ArticleJournal of physiological anthropology2024
Differences in the pupillary responses to evening light between children and adolescents.
Article in Journal of physiological anthropology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sex and age modulate the relationship between melanopsin-dependent light sensitivity and chronotype.Sleep · 2026Article
- Article
- Difference in pupillary response to red and blue color stimuli between glaucoma and Leber hereditary optic neuropathy patients with comparable central visual dysfunction.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2026Article
- The Circadian Response to Evening Light Spectra in Early Childhood: Preliminary Insights.Journal of biological rhythms · 2025Article
- Light at night and circadian rhythms: from the perspective of physiological anthropology research.Journal of physiological anthropology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn the mammalian retina, intrinsically-photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGC) detect light and integrate signals from rods and cones to drive multiple non-visual functions including circadian entrainment and the pupillary light response (PLR). Non-visual photoreception and consequently non-visual sensitivity to light may change across child development. The PLR represents a quick and reliable method for examining non-visual responses to light in children. The purpose of this study was to assess differences in the PLRs to blue and red stimuli, measured one hour prior to bedtime, between children and adolescents.
methodsForty healthy participants (8-9 years, n = 21; 15-16 years, n = 19) completed a PLR assessment 1 h before their habitual bedtime. After a 1 h dim-light adaptation period (< 1 lx), baseline pupil diameter was measured in darkness for 30 s, followed by a 10 s exposure to 3.0 × 10
resultsAcross both age groups, maximum pupil constriction was significantly greater (p < 0.001, η
conclusionsBlue light elicited a greater and more sustained pupillary response than red light in children and adolescents. However, the overall amplitude of the rod/cone-driven phasic response was greater in children than in adolescents. Our findings using the PLR highlight a higher sensitivity to evening light in children compared to adolescents, and continued maturation of the human non-visual photoreception/system throughout development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.