ArticleiScience2026
Examining the relationship between ssVEP and psychophysical measures of contrast sensitivity, grating acuity, and orientation discrimination.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.