Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33953220›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Eye movement characteristics provide an objective measure of visual processing changes in patients with visual snow syndrome.

Emma J Solly, Meaghan Clough, Allison M McKendrick, Paige Foletta, Owen B White, Joanne Fielding

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Serotonin reuptake inhibiting antidepressants: A trigger for visual snow syndrome?The International journal of risk & safety in medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Visual Snow Syndrome: Therapeutic Implications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Adapting to Visual Noise Alleviates Visual Snow.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

6 authors.

Emma J SollyDepartment of Neuroscience, Central Clinical School, Monash University, 6th Floor, The Alfred Centre, 99 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Meaghan CloughDepartment of Neuroscience, Central Clinical School, Monash University, 6th Floor, The Alfred Centre, 99 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Allison M McKendrickDepartment of Optometry and Vision Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Paige FolettaDepartment of Neuroscience, Central Clinical School, Monash University, 6th Floor, The Alfred Centre, 99 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Owen B WhiteDepartment of Neuroscience, Central Clinical School, Monash University, 6th Floor, The Alfred Centre, 99 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Joanne FieldingDepartment of Neuroscience, Central Clinical School, Monash University, 6th Floor, The Alfred Centre, 99 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia. joanne.fielding@monash.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual snow syndrome (VSS) is a poorly understood neurological disorder that features a range of disabling sensory changes. Visual processing changes revealed previously in VSS appear consistent with poor attentional control, specifically, with difficulty controlling environmentally driven shifts of attention. This study sought to confirm this proposal by determining whether these changes were similarly evident where attention is internally driven. Sixty seven VSS patients and 37 controls completed two saccade tasks: the endogenously cued saccade task and saccadic Simon task. The endogenously cued saccade task correctly (valid trial) or incorrectly (invalid trial) pre-cues a target location using a centrally presented arrow. VSS patients generated significantly shorter saccade latencies for valid trials (p = 0.03), resulting in a greater magnitude cue effect (p = 0.02), i.e. the difference in latency between valid and invalid trials. The saccadic Simon task presents a peripheral cue which may be spatially congruent or incongruent with the subsequent target location. Latencies on this task were comparable for VSS patients and controls, with a normal Simon effect, i.e. shorter latencies for saccades to targets spatially congruent with the preceding cue. On both tasks, VSS patients generated more erroneous saccades than controls towards non-target locations (Endogenously cued saccade task: p = 0.02, saccadic Simon task: p = 0.04). These results demonstrate that cued shifts of attention differentially affect saccade generation in VSS patients. We propose that these changes are not due to impairment of frontally-mediated inhibitory control, but to heightened saccade-related activity in visual regions. These results contribute to a VSS ocular motor signature that may provide clinical utility as well as an objective measure of dysfunction to facilitate future research.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAttentionEye Movement MeasurementsEye MovementsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhotic StimulationReaction TimeSaccadesVision DisordersVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33953220
PMCPMC8099863

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.