Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34807938›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2021

Portable eye-tracking as a reliable assessment of oculomotor, cognitive and reaction time function: Normative data for 18-45 year old.

Aura Kullmann, Robin C Ashmore, Alexandr Braverman, Christian Mazur, Hillary Snapp, Erin Williams, Mikhaylo Szczupak, Sara Murphy, Kathryn Marshall, James Crawford and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Implementing New Technologies to Improve Visual-Spatial Functions in Patients with Impaired Consciousness.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

13 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Aura KullmannNeurolign USA LLC, a Subsidiary of Neurolign Technologies Inc. (formerly Neuro Kinetics, Inc.), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6625-2946
Robin C AshmoreNeurolign USA LLC, a Subsidiary of Neurolign Technologies Inc. (formerly Neuro Kinetics, Inc.), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Alexandr BravermanDepartment of Statistics and Data Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Christian MazurNeurolign USA LLC, a Subsidiary of Neurolign Technologies Inc. (formerly Neuro Kinetics, Inc.), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Hillary SnappDepartment of Otolaryngology, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, United States of America.
Erin WilliamsDepartment of Otolaryngology, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, United States of America.
Mikhaylo SzczupakDepartment of Otolaryngology, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, United States of America.
Sara MurphyNaval Medical Center, San Diego, California, United States of America.
Kathryn MarshallDepartment of Defense, Hearing Center of Excellence, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America.
James CrawfordMadigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington, United States of America.
Carey D BalabanDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Michael HofferDepartment of Otolaryngology, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, United States of America.
Alexander KidermanNeurolign USA LLC, a Subsidiary of Neurolign Technologies Inc. (formerly Neuro Kinetics, Inc.), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Neuro Kinetics (United States) · USUniversity of Miami · USHebrew University of Jerusalem · ILMadigan Army Medical Center · USNaval Medical Center San Diego · USUnited States Department of Defense · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

Development of a pediatric oculomotor and vestibular normative database as an essential tool for objective evaluation of concussion and return-to-school/playR44HD100247 · NICHD · NEUROLIGN USA, LLC · PI HOFFER, MICHAEL E., KIDERMAN, ALEXANDER D · 2019 to 2019
$225k
Computerized Rotational Head Impulse Test-Vertical (crHIT-vertical)R43DC014611 · NIDCD · NEUROLIGN USA, LLC · PI KIDERMAN, ALEXANDER D · 2015 to 2015
$150k
CLC NIH HHS C0000008NICHD NIH HHS R44 HD100247NIDCD NIH HHS R43 DC014611
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Eye movements measured by high precision eye-tracking technology represent a sensitive, objective, and non-invasive method to probe functional neural pathways. Oculomotor tests (e.g., saccades and smooth pursuit), tests that involve cognitive processing (e.g., antisaccade and predictive saccade), and reaction time tests have increasingly been showing utility in the diagnosis and monitoring of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in research settings. Currently, the adoption of these tests into clinical practice is hampered by a lack of a normative data set. The goal of this study was to construct a normative database to be used as a reference for comparing patients' results. Oculomotor, cognitive, and reaction time tests were administered to male and female volunteers, aged 18-45, who were free of any neurological, vestibular disorders, or other head injuries. Tests were delivered using either a rotatory chair equipped with video-oculography goggles (VOG) or a portable virtual reality-like VOG goggle device with incorporated infrared eye-tracking technology. Statistical analysis revealed no effects of age on test metrics when participant data were divided into pediatric (i.e.,18-21 years, following FDA criteria) and adult (i.e., 21-45 years) groups. Gender (self-reported) had an effect on auditory reaction time, with males being faster than females. Pooled data were used to construct a normative database using 95% reference intervals (RI) with 90% confidence intervals on the upper and lower limits of the RI. The availability of these RIs readily allows clinicians to identify specific metrics that are deficient, therefore aiding in rapid triage, informing and monitoring treatment and/or rehabilitation protocols, and aiding in the return to duty/activity decision. This database is FDA cleared for use in clinical practice (K192186).

Indexed as

Eye MovementsAdolescentAdultCognitionEye-Tracking TechnologyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReaction TimeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34807938
PMCPMC8608311
OpenAlexW3216224801

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.