Cited by 58Neuroscience and Neural EngineeringPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchTactile and Sensory Interactions

New Vision for Visual Prostheses

Open access
Farnum, Alexander, Pelled, Galit·2020·Frontiers in Neuroscience

Abstract

Developments of new strategies to restore vision and improving on current strategies by harnessing new advancements in material and electrical sciences, and biological and genetic-based technologies are of upmost health priorities around the world. Federal and private entities are spending billions of dollars on visual prosthetics technologies. This review describes the most current and state-of-the-art bioengineering technologies to restore vision. This includes a thorough description of traditional electrode-based visual prosthetics that have improved substantially since early prototypes. Recent advances in molecular and synthetic biology have transformed vision-assisted technologies; For example, optogenetic technologies that introduce light-responsive proteins offer excellent resolution but cortical applications are restricted by fiber implantation and tissue damage. Other stimulation modalities, such as magnetic fields, have been explored to achieve non-invasive neuromodulation. Miniature magnetic coils are currently being developed to activate select groups of neurons. Magnetically-responsive nanoparticles or exogenous proteins can significantly enhance the coupling between external electromagnetic devices and any neurons affiliated with these modifications. The need to minimize cytotoxic effects for nanoparticle-based therapies will likely restrict the number of usable materials. Nevertheless, advances in identifying and utilizing proteins that respond to magnetic fields may lead to non-invasive, cell-specific stimulation and may overcome many of the limitations that currently exist with other methods. Finally, sensory substitution systems also serve as viable visual prostheses by converting visual input to auditory and somatosensory stimuli. This review also discusses major challenges in the field and offers bioengineering strategies to overcome those.

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 · 10.3389/fnins.2020.00036

Cites

158 of 158 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Retinal prostheses can profit from the retinotopic organisation and early positioning in the visual pathway.

    “Besides the ease of surgical accessibility, they can also profit from the retinotopic organisation and early positioning in the visual pathway [26,27].”
  • Placing the electrodes in higher visual areas where spatial representation is still preserved could be a possible solution to enlarge the visual field.

    “Therefore, placing the electrodes in higher visual areas where spatial representation is still preserved [26,103] could be a possible solution to enlarge the visual field.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Gabel V. P. (2016). Artificial Vision: A Clinical Guide. Berlin: Springer.
  2. Hornig R. Dapper M. Le Joliff E. Hill R. Ishaque K. Posch C. (2017). Artificial Vision. Berlin: Springer, 99– 113.
  3. Kyada M. J. Killian N. J. Pezaris J. S. (2017). Artificial Vision. Berlin: Springer, 177– 189.
  4. Li L. Sun M. Cao P. Cai C. Chai X. Li X. (2008). 7th Asian-Pacific Conference on Medical and Biological Engineering. Berlin: Springer, 54– 57.
  5. Lowery A. J. Rosenfeld J. V. Rosa M. G. Brunton E. Rajan R. Mann C. (2017). Artificial Vision. Berlin: Springer, 215– 225.
  6. Trobe J. D. (2001). The Neurology of Vision. Oxford: Oxford university press.
  7. Troyk P. R. (2017). Artificial Vision. 203– 214. Berlin: Springer.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Farnum, A., & Pelled, G.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Corresponding author
Pelled, Galit
Venue
Frontiers in Neuroscience
Published
2020-02-18
Volume
14
Pages
36-36
ISSN
1662-453X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3008436020
Cited by
58
References
158
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 1
FWCI
1.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Photoreceptor and optogenetics research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
retinal prosthesis, vision restoration, optogenetics, magnetic stimulation, magnetic nanoparticles, neuromodulation, sensory substitution, light-responsive proteins

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