bioRxiv ScienceSearch

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2020.02.03.932905

What do blind people "see" with retinal prostheses? Observations and qualitative reports of epiretinal implant users

Abstract

Introduction: Retinal implants have now been approved and commercially available for certain clinical populations for over 5 years, with hundreds of individuals implanted, scores of them closely followed in research trials. Despite these numbers, however, few data are available that would help us answer basic questions regarding the nature and outcomes of artificial vision: what do participants see when the device is turned on for the first time, and how does that change over time? Methods: Semi-structured interviews and observations were undertaken at two sites in France and the UK with 16 participants who had received either the Argus II or IRIS II devices. Data were collected at various time points in the process that implant recipients went through in receiving and learning to use the device, including initial evaluation, implantation, initial activation and systems fitting, re-education and finally post-education. These data were supplemented with data from interviews conducted with vision rehabilitation specialists at the clinical sites and clinical researchers at the device manufacturers (Second Sight and Pixium Vision). Observational and interview data were transcribed, coded and analyzed using an approach guided by Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). Results: Implant recipients described the perceptual experience produced by their epiretinal implants as fundamentally, qualitatively different than natural vision. All used terms that invoked electrical stimuli to describe the appearance of their percepts, yet the characteristics used to describe the percepts varied significantly between participants. Artificial vision for these participants was a highly specific, learned skill-set that combined particular bodily techniques, associative learning and deductive reasoning in order to build a "lexicon of flashes" - a distinct perceptual vocabulary that they then used to decompose, recompose and interpret their surroundings. The percept did not transform over time; rather, the participant became better at interpreting the signals they received. The process of using the device never ceased to be cognitively fatiguing, and did not come without risk or cost to the participant. In exchange, participants received hope and purpose through participation, as well as a new kind of sensory signal that may not have afforded practical or functional use in daily life but, for some, provided a kind of "contemplative perception" that participants tailored to individualized activities. Conclusion: Attending to the qualitative reports of participants regarding the experience of artificial vision provides valuable information not captured by extant clinical outcome measures. These data can both inform device design and rehabilitative techniques, as well as grant a more holistic understanding of the phenomenon of artificial vision.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Erickson-Davis, C., Korzybska, H.. 2020-02-04. What do blind people "see" with retinal prostheses? Observations and qualitative reports of epiretinal implant users. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.03.932905

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Cell Types in Describing Neuronal Physiological Features

Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) captures detailed gene expression profiles at scale, while patch-clamp recordings measure intrinsic neuronal electrophysiological properties. Modeling the relations between these two modalities remains a challenge. Here, we compare how well electrophysiological features can be predicted by traditional transcriptomic cell type classification, representations derived from a foundational model (scGPT) pretrained on large-scale scRNA-seq datasets, ion channel-coding genes, and highly variable genes. Using paired transcriptomic and electrophysiological patch-sequencing data from 495 human neurons from neurosurgical tissue, we find that cluster-level cell type representations consistently outperform highly variable gene selection, ion channel gene selection, and context-enriched scGPT embeddings. Notably, performance varies across model architectures and initializations, and the best results are obtained by combining the outputs of separate cell type and scGPT-based models. Together, these findings suggest that traditional discrete cellular classification is highly effective in predicting physiological features. For maximum performance it can be complemented by pretrained transformer models.

neuroscience

A nonlinear inhibition pathway underlying cortical responses to tuned holographic optogenetic perturbations

Optogenetics enables causal manipulation of cortical activity. Perturbation responses can be counterintuitive due to network interactions, making theory essential for predicting them. Existing approaches often rely on linear approximations, which fail for many biologically relevant perturbations. Here we develop a nonlinear theory of responses to holographic perturbations in cell-type-specific recurrent networks with structured connectivity. We fit a nonlinear model to mouse V1 data, which shows cotuned-ensemble suppression: perturbing spatially clustered neurons with similar preferred orientations yields markedly stronger short-range suppression than perturbing untuned ensembles. We show that cotuned-ensemble suppression arises from a feature-tuned, nonlinear inhibition pathway implicating somatostatin-positive (SST) interneurons. The theory predicts that cotuned ensembles suppress parvalbumin-positive (PV) neurons but facilitate SST neurons, and links the degree of cotuned-ensemble suppression or facilitation to the variance of the SST response. This framework identifies mechanisms by which nonlinear inhibition sculpts cortical dynamics and establishes a predictive basis for targeted optogenetic interventions.

neuroscience

Proteomic signatures of APOE ε4 across human tissues and cell types in Alzheimers disease

The apolipoprotein E {varepsilon}4 (APOE {varepsilon}4) allele is the strongest genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimers disease (AD). However, the underlying molecular mechanisms remain unclear. This study included 1691 participants from the Religious Orders Study and Rush Memory and Aging Project (ROSMAP), 1226 participants from the Accelerating Medicines Partnership - Alzheimers Disease (AMP-AD) Diverse Cohorts Study, and 735 participants from the Alzheimers Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). To characterise APOE {varepsilon}4 molecular effects, we analysed proteomic data from plasma, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived astrocytes and neurons, as well as transcriptomic and proteomic data from multiple brain regions. The association of APOE {varepsilon}4 with AD neuropathology was also examined. APOE {varepsilon}4 carriers shared a plasma proteomic signature enriched for immune processes, irrespective of AD diagnosis. A machine learning classifier trained on this signature discriminated APOE {varepsilon}4 carriers from non-carriers in an independent cohort using CSF proteomics. APOE {varepsilon}4 carriage was associated with higher Braak stages and Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimers Disease (CERAD) score. However, only limited APOE {varepsilon}4-associated transcriptomic and proteomic changes were observed in bulk brain tissue, with poor cross-layer concordance. Proteomic analyses of iPSC-derived astrocytes and neurons further revealed cell-type-specific APOE {varepsilon}4-associated changes. APOE {varepsilon}4 is associated with a consistent proteomic signature across plasma and CSF. Its molecular effects in the brain differ across cell types, brain regions and molecular layers. These findings support the need for cell-type-resolved multi-omic studies to elucidate how APOE {varepsilon}4 confers AD risk.

neuroscience