ArticleClinical neurophysiology practice2017
Use of eye tracking improves the detection of evoked responses to complex visual stimuli during EEG in infants.
Article in Clinical neurophysiology practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of computer vision analysis for labeling inattention periods in EEG recordings with visual stimuli.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Coregistration of EEG and eye-tracking in infants and developing populations.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Review
- Implementation of mobile EEG for resting-state and visual evoked potentials in young children in rural Ethiopia.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo improve the reliability of detecting EEG responses evoked by complex visual stimuli to the level required for clinical use by integrating an eye tracker to the EEG setup and optimizing the analysis protocol.
methodsInfants were presented with continuous orientation reversal (OR), global form (GF), and global motion (GM) stimuli. Eye tracking was used to control stimulus presentation and exclude epochs with disoriented gaze. The spectral responses were estimated from 13 postcentral EEG channels using a circular variant of Hotelling's T
resultsAmong 39 healthy infants, statistically significant (p < 0.01) responses to OR/GF/GM stimuli were found from 92%/100%/95% recordings, respectively. The specificity test of the detection algorithm, using non-stimulated baseline EEG, did not yield any false-positive findings. Taken together, this yields 15% improvement on average in the detection performance compared to that in the current literature.
conclusionsChanges to the test protocol and incorporation of the eye tracking information improves the detection of responses to complex visual stimuli in infants. SIGNIFICANCE: This work presents a test protocol suitable for use in a clinical environment at a level of reliability that allows individual diagnostics.
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.