ArticleVision research2022
Oculomotor changes following learned use of an eccentric retinal locus.
Article in Vision research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Distinct roles of central and peripheral vision in rapid scene understanding.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Examining oculomotor behavior in central vision loss with a gaze-contingent display.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Eye movements in visual impairment.Vision research · 2023Article
- Innovative vision rehabilitation method for hemianopsia: Comparing pre- and post audio-luminous biofeedback training for ocular motility improving visual functions and quality of life.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
People with bilateral central vision loss sometimes develop a new point of oculomotor reference called a preferred retinal locus (PRL) that is used for fixating and planning saccadic eye movements. How individuals develop and learn to effectively use a PRL is still debated; in particular, the time course of learning to plan saccades using a PRL and learning to stabilize peripheral fixation at the desired location. Here we address knowledge limitations through research describing how eye movements change as a person learns to adopt an eccentric retinal locus. Using a gaze-contingent, eye tracking-guided paradigm to simulate central vision loss, 40 participants developed a PRL by engaging in an oculomotor and visual recognition task. After 12 training sessions, significant improvements were observed in six eye movement metrics addressing different aspects involved in learning to use a PRL: first saccade landing dispersion, saccadic re-referencing, saccadic precision, saccadic latency, percentage of useful trials, and fixation stability. Importantly, our analyses allowed separate examination of the stability of target fixation separately from the dispersion and precision of the landing location of saccades. These measures explained 50% of the across-subject variance in accuracy. Fixation stability and saccadic precision showed a strong, positive correlation. Although there was no statistically significant difference in rate of learning, individuals did tend to learn saccadic precision faster than fixation stability. Saccadic precision was also more associated with accuracy than fixation stability for the behavioral task. This suggests effective intervention strategies in low vision should address both fixation stability and saccadic precision.
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.