ArticleInternational ophthalmology2022
Age norms for grating acuity and contrast sensitivity in children using eye tracking technology.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and Clinical Validation of a Digital Eye-Tracking-Based Cover Test for Ocular Misalignment.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- A review of experimental task design in psychophysical eye tracking research.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Review
- Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity in Preterm and Full-Term Children Using a Novel Digital Test.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
key messagesVisual acuity is the most used method to assess visual function in children. Contrast sensitivity complements the information provided for visual acuity, but it is not commonly used in clinical practice. Digital devices are increasingly used as a method to evaluate visual function, due to multiple advantages. Testing with these devices can improve the evaluation of visual development in children from a few months of age. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity tests, using eye tracking technology, are able to measure visual function in children across a wide range of ages, objectively, quickly and without need of an experienced examiner. PURPOSE: To report age-normative values for grating visual acuity and contrast sensitivity in healthy children using a digital device with eye tracking technology and to validate the grating acuity test.
methodsIn the first project of the study, we examined healthy children aged between 6 months and 7 years with normal ophthalmological assessment. Grating visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS) were assessed using a preferential gaze paradigm with a DIVE (Device for an Integral Visual Examination) assisted with eye tracking technology to provide age norms. For the validation project, we compared LEA grating test (LGT) with DIVE VA in a group of children aged between 6 months and 4 years with normal and abnormal visual development.
resultsFifty-seven children (2.86 ± 1.55 years) were examined with DIVE VA test and 44 successfully completed DIVE CS test (3.06 ± 1.41 years). Both, VA and CS values increased with age, mainly along the first two years of life. Sixty-nine patients (1.34 ± 0.61 years) were included in the DIVE VA test validation. The mean difference between LGT and DIVE VA was - 1.05 ± 4.54 cpd with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of - 9.95-7.84 cpd. Agreement between the two tests was higher in children younger than 1 year with a mean difference of - 0.19 ± 4.02 cpd.
conclusionsDIVE is an automatic, objective and reliable tool to assess several visual function parameters in children, and it has good agreement with classical VA tests, especially for the first stage of life.
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.