ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2026
The effect of high-frequency light flicker on pattern-reversal and steady-state visual evoked potentials in healthy subjects.
Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe investigated the effect of screen technology on visual evoked potentials (VEPs) by comparing a standard Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) screen with two Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) Light-Emitting Diode (LED) screens with differing levels of latency and high-frequency backlight flicker.
methodsAll screens were calibrated to emit the same luminance and color composition. 19 young healthy subjects underwent VEP recording using checkerboard patterns with check widths of 0.26 degrees (º), 0.51º and 1.03º. Pattern Reversal VEPs (prVEPs) were recorded from occipital (O1, Oz, and O2) electrodes referenced to a frontal electrode (Fz), and Steady State VEPs (SSVEPs) were recorded using a standard International 10-20 electrode cap.
resultsprVEP peak latencies were prolonged and amplitudes were slightly larger with LCD screens compared to the CRT screen, though the high-flicker LCD screen had slightly shorter peak latencies. Pattern-reversal SSVEP at 10 and 12 reversals/s entrained cortical activity to a comparable level across all screens, with no representation of high-frequency backlight flicker or its subharmonics detected in the SSVEP signal.
conclusionBacklight flicker characteristics, timing jitter and latency affects VEP. SIGNIFICANCE: These findings suggest that backlight flicker, timing jitter and latency should be considered when selecting LCD screens for clinical VEP recordings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42782568What 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.