Cited by 38Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringTactile and Sensory InteractionsRetinal Development and Disorders

Identification of characters and localization of images using direct multiple-electrode stimulation with a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis

Open access
Shivdasani, Mohit N., Sinclair, Nicholas C., Gillespie, Lisa N., Petoe, Matthew A., Titchener, Samuel A., Fallon, James B., Perera, Thushara, Pardinas-Diaz, Darien +3 more·2017·Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science

Abstract

Purpose: Retinal prostheses provide vision to blind patients by eliciting phosphenes through electrical stimulation. This study explored whether character identification and image localization could be achieved through direct multiple-electrode stimulation with a suprachoroidal retinal prosthesis. Methods: Two of three retinitis pigmentosa patients implanted with a suprachoroidal electrode array were tested on three psychophysical tasks. Electrode patterns were stimulated to elicit perception of simple characters, following which percept localization was tested using either static or dynamic images. Eye tracking was used to assess the association between accuracy and eye movements. Results: In the character identification task, accuracy ranged from 2.7% to 93.3%, depending on the patient and character. In the static image localization task, accuracy decreased from near perfect to <20% with decreasing contrast (patient 1). Patient 2 scored up to 70% at 100% contrast. In the dynamic image localization task, patient 1 recognized the trajectory of the image up to speeds of 64 deg/s, whereas patient 2 scored just above chance. The degree of eye movement in both patients was related to accuracy and, to some extent, stimulus direction. Conclusions: The ability to identify characters and localize percepts demonstrates the capacity of the suprachoroidal device to provide meaningful information to blind patients. The variation in scores across all tasks highlights the importance of using spatial cues from phosphenes, which becomes more difficult at low contrast. The use of spatial information from multiple electrodes and eye-movement compensation is expected to improve performance outcomes during real-world prosthesis use in a camera-based system. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01603576.).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1167/iovs.16-21311

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The presence of choroid, RPE, and debris of photoreceptors makes the selective stimulation of BCs extremely difficult, leading to poor spatial resolution.

    “The presence of choroid, RPE, and debris of photoreceptors makes the selective stimulation of BCs extremely difficult, leading to poor spatial resolution [59,60].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 24 · Cited by 38

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Klauke S, Goertz M, Rein S, et al. Stimulation with a wireless intraocular epiretinal implant elicits visual percepts in blind humans: results from stimulation tests during the epiret3 prospective clinical trial. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52: 449-455.
  2. Horsager A, Greenberg RJ, Fine I. Spatiotemporal interactions in retinal prosthesis subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51:1223-1233.

Authors
Shivdasani, M. N., Sinclair, N. C., Gillespie, L. N., Petoe, M. A., Titchener, S. A., Fallon, J. B., Perera, T., Pardinas-Diaz, D., Barnes, N. M., Blamey, P. J., & for the Bionic Vision Australia Consortium
Affiliations
  • Bionics Institute (AU)
  • Australian National University (AU)
Corresponding author
Shivdasani, Mohit N.
Venue
Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science
Published
2017-08-09
Volume
58
Issue
10
Pages
3962
ISSN
  • 0146-0404 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5783
OpenAlex
W2743184974
Cited by
38
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6
FWCI
2.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • State Government of Victoria
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1082358, 529923)
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, character identification, image localization, phosphenes, retinitis pigmentosa, visual impairment, eye movements, stimulus contrast, spatial cues
MeSH terms
Adult, Electric Stimulation, Electrodes, Implanted, Female, Humans, Male, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychophysics, Retina, Retinitis Pigmentosa, Saccades, Young Adult, 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