ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2015
Impact of Wet Macular Degeneration on the Execution of Natural Actions.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of visual performance and eye movements in patients with blue light-filtering intraocular lenses versus ultraviolet light-filtering intraocular lenses.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Article
- Saccades during visual search in macular degeneration.Vision research · 2022Article
- Eye Movements in Macular Degeneration.Annual review of vision science · 2021Review
- The importance of peripheral vision when searching 3D real-world scenes: A gaze-contingent study in virtual reality.Journal of vision · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo use eye movements to investigate how people with a central scotoma might be impaired in the execution of natural actions and whether task familiarity affects performance.
methodsSixteen participants with AMD and 16 age-matched controls performed two natural actions: (1) a familiar sandwich-making task and (2) a less familiar model-building task. In each action, task-relevant and task-irrelevant objects were placed on a table, covering 90°. The participants were asked to execute the actions without a time constraint. Eye movements were recorded.
resultsThe people with AMD were significantly slower than the controls, both in the exploration phase (before the first reaching movement) and in the working phase (execution of action), especially in the unfamiliar task. Gaze duration was longer on relevant than irrelevant objects in both groups and tasks, as might be expected. However, for the participants with AMD, gaze durations were longer on all of the objects, whether relevant or irrelevant, except in the more familiar task. This suggests that participants with AMD take longer to extract the information they need but that this can be counteracted when the task items are familiar. The number of saccades/min of the task was significantly greater for the people with AMD than for the controls.
conclusionsThe present results show that people with AMD can accomplish natural actions efficiently, but need longer gaze durations and more eye movements than normally sighted people. This effect can be reduced when executing a familiar task.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.