Cited by 109Visual perception and processing mechanismsVestibular and auditory disordersEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Pattern reversal evoked potentials: gender differences and age-related changes in amplitude and latency.

Emmerson-Hanover, Rita, Shearer, Donald E., Creel, Donnell J., Dustman, Robert E.·1994·Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section

Abstract

This report is intended to complement the current body of literature by describing pattern reversal evoked potential (PREP) component amplitudes and latencies in a larger sample than has been previously studied and providing comparisons of males and females across the lifespan. Binocular PREPs were measured from 406 normal subjects, 6-80 years of age. In general, latencies were found to decrease during maturation, stabilize across early adulthood, then begin to increase sometime after the late 20s. There were minimal gender differences in latencies during development but males tended to have longer latencies than females during adulthood. Across the lifespan, amplitudes were larger for females. Results of regression analyses using the entire data set were compared to results of separate regression analyses for developmental years (6-20) and adulthood (21-80). Separate analyses appear to provide more useful descriptions of PREP latency and amplitude changes across the lifespan. It is clear that predicted normal values can vary depending on age range and relative proportion of males and females comprising a reference sample. Appropriate clinical values should be based on age- and sex-matched normal subjects and should be specific with regard to technical and methodological variables.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0168-5597(94)90049-3

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Early cortical visual evoked potential latencies appear to have stable latencies across the adult life span.

    “which, like SDTs, appear to have stable latencies across the adult life span (Emmerson-Hanover et al., 1994).”

    From Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time (2015) · cites this paper as Emmerson-Hanover et al., 1994

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Emmerson-Hanover, R., Shearer, D. E., Creel, D. J., & Dustman, R. E.
Affiliations
University of Utah (US)
Corresponding author
Emmerson-Hanover, Rita
Venue
Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1994-03
Volume
92
Issue
2
Pages
93-101
ISSN
0168-5597 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2050671959
Cited by
109
References
42
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vestibular and auditory disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
pattern reversal evoked potentials, gender differences, age-related changes, evoked potential latency, evoked potential amplitude, lifespan development, reference values
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Brain, Child, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Reaction Time, Sex Characteristics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review