Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28057580›Full record

ArticleVision research2017

Monocular and binocular smooth pursuit in central field loss.

Natela Shanidze, Stephen Heinen, Preeti Verghese

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vision research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. How People With Vision Impairment Use Their Gaze to Hit a Ball.Translational vision science & technology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Eye Tracking in Optometry: A Systematic Review.Journal of eye movement research · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Eye Movements in Macular Degeneration.Annual review of vision science · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Natela ShanidzeSmith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA. Electronic address: natela@ski.org.
Stephen HeinenSmith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Preeti VergheseSmith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute · USSmith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute · US

Funding

Maximizing Visual Potential in Age-Related Macular DegenerationR01EY027390 · NEI · SMITH-KETTLEWELL EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI Preeti Verghese · 2017 to 2026
$5.7M
Recovery of Stereopsis in Age-Related Macular DegenerationR01EY022394 · NEI · SMITH-KETTLEWELL EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI VERGHESE, PREETI · 2012 to 2014
$1.1M
Oculomotor Strategies in Central Field LossF32EY025151 · NEI · SMITH-KETTLEWELL EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI SHANIDZE, NATELA M. · 2015 to 2016
$82k
NEI NIH HHS F32 EY025151NEI NIH HHS R01 EY022394NEI NIH HHS R01 EY027390
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Macular degeneration results in heterogeneous central field loss (CFL) and often has asymmetrical effects in the two eyes. As such, it is not clear to what degree the movements of the two eyes are coordinated. To address this issue, we examined smooth pursuit quantitatively in CFL participants during binocular viewing and compared it to the monocular viewing case. We also examined coordination of the two eyes during smooth pursuit and how this coordination was affected by interocular ratios of acuity and contrast, as well as CFL-specific interocular differences, such as scotoma sizes and degree of binocular overlap. We hypothesized that the coordination of eye movements would depend on the binocularity of the two eyes. To test our hypotheses, we used a modified step-ramp paradigm, and measured pursuit in both eyes while viewing was binocular, or monocular with the dominant or non-dominant eye. Data for CFL participants and age-matched controls were examined at the group, within-group, and individual levels. We found that CFL participants had a broader range of smooth pursuit gains and a significantly lower correlation between the two eyes, as compared to controls. Across both CFL and control groups, smooth pursuit gain and correlation between the eyes are best predicted by the ratio of contrast sensitivity between the eyes. For the subgroup of participants with measurable stereopsis, both smooth pursuit gain and correlation are best predicted by stereoacuity. Therefore, our results suggest that coordination between the eyes during smooth pursuit depends on binocular cooperation between the eyes.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCase-Control StudiesContrast SensitivityDepth PerceptionFemaleHumansMacular DegenerationMaleMiddle AgedPursuit, SmoothScotomaVision, BinocularVision, MonocularCentral field lossConjugate eye movementsMacular degenerationSmooth pursuit

Identifiers

PMID28057580
PMCPMC5502200
OpenAlexW2571431914

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.