Cited by 17Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringTactile and Sensory InteractionsRetinal Development and Disorders

Spatiotemporal interactions in the visual cortex following paired electrical stimulation of the retina

Cicione, R., Fallon, J. B., Rathbone, G. D., Williams, C. E., Shivdasani, M. N.·2014·Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science

Abstract

PURPOSE: Retinal prostheses use spatiotemporal patterns of electrical stimulation across multiple electrodes to provide visual percepts to blind patients. It is generally assumed that percepts produced by individual electrodes are independent of one another, which may not be the case. In this study, we aimed to quantify interactions between pairs of electrical stimuli delivered to the retina. METHODS: Normally sighted cats were implanted with a suprachoroidal electrode array. The retina was stimulated with a paired-pulse paradigm that consisted of a conditioning stimulus followed by a test stimulus, while recording multiunit activity in the visual cortex. Conditioning current, and spatial and temporal separation between the conditioning and test stimuli were varied. Cortical interactions were quantified by changes in multiunit activity elicited by stimulation with the paired-pulse paradigm, compared to stimulation of the test stimulus alone (control). RESULTS: Interactions varied as a function of conditioning current and temporal separation between the two stimulating pulses. Cortical activity increased compared to the control condition at an interstimulus delay of 1.025 ms and was significantly suppressed for delays between 20 and 90 ms, returning to near control levels for longer delays. The level of interactions increased when the conditioning current was increased. Interactions were found to be similar for electrode separations up to 3 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Interactions between sequential stimulation of pairs of electrodes in a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis occur for delays up to 100 ms and electrode separations of several millimeters. Knowledge of these spatiotemporal interactions is essential for developing effective patterns of stimulation for retinal prostheses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1167/iovs.14-14754

Cites

72 of 72 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cicione, R., Fallon, J. B., Rathbone, G. D., Williams, C. E., & Shivdasani, M. N.
Affiliations
Bionics Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Shivdasani, M. N.
Venue
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science
Published
2014-11-04
Volume
55
Issue
12
Pages
7726-7738
ISSN
0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2323745261
Cited by
17
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3
FWCI
1.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinal Development and Disorders
Keywords
retinal prosthesis, paired-pulse stimulation, spatiotemporal interaction, visual cortex, multi-unit activity, electrode separation, stimulation patterns
MeSH terms
Animals, Cats, Electric Stimulation, Electrodes, Implanted, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Retina, Sensory Thresholds, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception, Models, Animal, Visual Prosthesis

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