ArticleActa ophthalmologica2019
Saccade latencies during a preferential looking task and objective scoring of grating acuity in children with and without visual impairments.
Article in Acta ophthalmologica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Novel Eye Tracking-Based Gamified Assessment of Contrast Sensitivity Function in Children: Prospective Development and Reliability Study.JMIR serious games · 2025Article
- Pediatric eye movement-based perimetry: progress, pitfalls, and prospects.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Estimating Phosphene Locations Using Eye Movements of Suprachoroidal Retinal Prosthesis Users.Translational vision science & technology · 2023Article
- Eye Tracking in Optometry: A Systematic Review.Journal of eye movement research · 2023Article
- Editorial: Cerebral visual impairment, visual development, diagnosis, and rehabilitation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- The Multidisciplinary Guidelines for Diagnosis and Referral in Cerebral Visual Impairment.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Visual fixations rather than saccades dominate the developmental eye movement test.Scientific reports · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe determined the latencies of orienting responses during a preferential looking task in children with normal vision and in children with visual impairments between 6 and 12 years old, and assessed the feasibility of scoring grating detection in these populations with video-based eye tracking.
methodsChildren performed a computerized preferential looking test, while a remote eye tracker measured the children's eye movements. The stimuli consisted of a 2 × 2 grid, with three uniform grey fields and one target field consisting of a black-and-white square wave grating. The grating was presented randomly at one of the four locations. The spatial frequencies (1.05, 2.11 and 7.02 cyc/deg) were randomly interleaved, with 10 trials per spatial frequency. Three different methods were used to score the accuracy of the responses: (1) primary saccade ends on target, (1) gaze 50% of the presentation time on target, and (3) a combination of method 1 and 2 (i.e. primary saccade ends on target, and/or gaze 50% of the presentation time on target).
resultsThe combined scoring method was most reliable to determine whether children could resolve the gratings. Children with visual impairments had significantly lower accuracies than children with normal vision with all three scoring methods. In addition, saccade latencies decreased with age and were significantly longer (62 ± 15 ms) in children with visual impairments.
conclusionThe use of eye tracking to assess grating detection with a preferential looking task in clinical populations provides valuable additional information, including objective detection measures and developmental delays in saccade latencies.
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.