ArticleClinical neurophysiology practice2026
Normative data of laser evoked potentials using Nd:YAP laser.
Article in Clinical neurophysiology practice, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To establish a robust multi-centre normative database for Nd:YAP laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) across distal and proximal stimulation sites, and to quantify the impact of laser spot size (energy density) and demographic factors on LEP parameters. Methods: One hundred nine healthy adults (57 females) were recruited from three centres (Geneva, Lyon, Saint-Etienne). Nd:YAP laser pulses were delivered with a 3-mm beam (Centre 1) or 4-mm beam (Centres 2-3). LEPs were recorded from standard EEG sites (including Fz/Cz/Pz and contralateral temporal leads). Stimulation sites included hand dorsum ( Results: The vertex N2-P2 complex was consistently recorded across centres and sites (100% for hand, thigh, neck; ∼97% for foot). N1 detection was less consistent, particularly with larger spot size and at the foot. Smaller spot size (higher energy density) yielded shorter N2/P2 latencies and larger N2-P2 amplitudes for hand stimulation, and shorter P2 latency for foot stimulation. Sex and height showed no significant effects. Increasing age was associated with longer N2/P2 latencies and reduced N2-P2 amplitudes for distal sites, with minimal age effects at proximal sites. Conclusions: This study provides the most comprehensive Nd:YAP LEP normative dataset to date, including distal and proximal sites and spot-size-specific reference limits. Significance: These data support standardized, high-specificity clinical interpretation of LEPs for assessing small-fibre and spinothalamic pathway dysfunction.
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.