Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34163391›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Contribution of Eye-Tracking to Study Cognitive Impairments Among Clinical Populations.

Alexandra Wolf, Kazuo Ueda

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Alexandra WolfJSPS International Research Fellow, Research Center for Applied Perceptual Science, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Kazuo UedaUnit of Perceptual Psychology, Dept. Human Science, Research Center for Applied Perceptual Science, Division of Auditory and Visual Perception Research, Research and Development Center for Five-Sense Devices, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the field of psychology, the merge of decision-theory and neuroscientific methods produces an array of scientifically recognized paradigms. For example, by exploring consumer's eye-movement behavior, researchers aim to deepen the understanding of how patterns of retinal activation are being meaningfully transformed into visual experiences and connected with specific reactions (e.g., purchase). Notably, eye-movements provide knowledge of one's homeostatic balance and gatekeep information that shape decisions. Hence, vision science investigates the quality of observed environments determined under various experimental conditions. Moreover, it answers questions on how human process visual stimuli and use gained information for a successful strategy to achieve certain goals. While capturing cognitive states with the support of the eye-trackers progresses at a relatively fast pace in decision-making research, measuring the visual performance of real-life tasks, which require complex cognitive skills, is tentatively translated into clinical experiments. Nevertheless, the potential of the human eye as a highly valuable source of biomarkers has been underlined. In this article, we aim to draw readers attention to decision-making experimental paradigms supported with eye-tracking technology among clinical populations. Such interdisciplinary approach may become an important component that will (i) help in objectively illustrating patient's models of beliefs and values, (ii) support clinical interventions, and (iii) contribute to health services. It is possible that shortly, eye-movement data from decision-making experiments will grant the scientific community a greater understanding of mechanisms underlining mental states and consumption practices that medical professionals consider as obsessions, disorders or addiction.

Indexed as

clinical researchcognitive impairmentsconsumer scienceeye-trackingneuromarketingtranslational practice

Identifiers

PMID34163391
PMCPMC8215550

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.