ReviewJournal of Parkinson's disease2025
Enhancing the diagnostic potential of electroretinography in Parkinson's disease: A review of protocol and cohort criteria.
Review in Journal of Parkinson's disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electroretinography has emerged as a promising tool for identifying retinal functional anomalies in major psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders, such as schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and autism spectrum disorder, positioning it as a potential biomarker of monoaminergic dysfunction. However, despite its potential, electroretinography studies in Parkinson's disease (PD) over the past decades have been inconsistent, largely due to variations in research methodologies. These limitations diminish its potential and hinder the association between retinal electrophysiological responses and PD neuropathology. To address this challenge, this review examines the most relevant sources of data variability and reduced reproducibility in electroretinography studies aimed at detecting a retinal functional signature characteristic of PD. We propose the consolidation of four key protocol factors and five cohort criteria to enhance the diagnostic accuracy of electroretinography in PD biomarker research. As electroretinography protocols are adapted from their clinical origins for research purposes, we argue that careful attention must be given to electrode type and placement, as well as to factors like age, sex, disease duration and severity, medication intake, psychiatric conditions, and comorbidities in cohort selection to ensure reproducible results. Suggesting that past inconsistencies in these areas may explain the variability in reported results and contribute to the lack of consensus on which electroretinography parameters comprise a disease signature in PD, we ultimately offer recommendations to improve the utility of electroretinography techniques as early biomarkers for PD.
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.