ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2022
Reflexive Saccades Used for Objective and Automated Measurements of Contrast Sensitivity in Selected Areas of Visual Field.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Novel Eye Tracking-Based Gamified Assessment of Contrast Sensitivity Function in Children: Prospective Development and Reliability Study.JMIR serious games · 2025Article
- A review of experimental task design in psychophysical eye tracking research.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study proposes a novel approach for objective and automated peripheral contrast sensitivity (CS) testing using reflexive saccades. Here the CS was examined in various areas the of visual field (VF) using a live analysis of gaze data. For validation of the new test, we examined CS with an established procedure of identifying the orientation of a contrast stimulus. Methods: To perform and validate the saccade-based testing, two separate measurement events were performed. In the first, participants were asked to execute a saccade toward a newly-appeared stimulus in their VF. After the saccade execution or stimulus expiry, reporting the target orientation was required in a four-alternatives forced choice (4AFC). Therefore the first measurement yields two outcomes (objective and subjective). In the second measurement, only the identification of the stimulus orientation was requested, while fixating a central mark. Stimulus contrast was controlled by an adaptive psychometric procedure in both measurements. Results: The study found strong correlations (all r ≥ 0.79) of CS values for all three possible testing methods (saccade-based responding in saccadic measurements, keyboard-based responding in saccadic measurements, keyboard-based responding in non-saccadic measurements), showing the feasibility of employment of reflexive saccades in such testing. Second, this study shows a significant influence of eccentricity and direction of the stimulus on the CS function. Conclusions: CS measured with reflexive saccades is comparable to other testing methods over several areas of the participant's VF. Hence, we propose it as a novel and objective testing procedure for CS measurements. Translational Relevance: Assessment of CS using reflexive saccades extends the portfolio of suggested eye movement-based tests, allowing objective examination across the VF, which might be helpful especially in the early detection of various eye diseases.
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.