Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42231954›Full record

ArticleiScience2026

Examining the relationship between ssVEP and psychophysical measures of contrast sensitivity, grating acuity, and orientation discrimination.

Martina Morea, Simona Garobbio, Marina Kunchulia, Michael H Herzog

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in iScience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Martina MoreaLaboratory of Psychophysics, Brain Mind Institute, School of Life Sciences, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Simona GarobbioLaboratory of Psychophysics, Brain Mind Institute, School of Life Sciences, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Marina KunchuliaResearch Institute of Cognitive Neurosciences, Free University of Tbilisi, Tbilisi 0159, Georgia.
Michael H HerzogLaboratory of Psychophysics, Brain Mind Institute, School of Life Sciences, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intuitively, we categorize individuals as good or poor performers. In vision, someone who performs well on one test is expected to do well on other tests. If so, test results should correlate with each other. However, studies have found low correlations between basic visual tests. One possible explanation is the detrimental influence of non-visual factors-such as attention or motivation-on correlations. To minimize these effects, we adopted steady-state visually evoked potentials (ssVEPs), which do not rely on subjective responses. 35 healthy participants performed contrast sensitivity, visual acuity, and orientation discrimination tests with psychophysics and ssVEPs. Although both methods showed high reliability, correlations between tests were weak. Thus, tests might target more specific aspects of vision than normally assumed. Furthermore, psychophysical and ssVEP measures did not correlate, suggesting that test outcomes depend on the method rather than the targeted visual abilities or that ssVEPs and psychophysics have different systematic errors.

Indexed as

neurosciencephysiologysensory neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID42231954
PMCPMC13223984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.