ArticleClinical & experimental optometry2023
Objective estimation of fusional reserves using infrared eye tracking: the digital fusion-range test.
Article in Clinical & experimental optometry, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do Two Eyes Identify Better than One? Interpretable Binocular Dynamics for Virtual Reality Gaze Biometrics.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
- The Effect of Prism Presentation Order on Near Vertical Fusional Vergence Ranges of Normal Young Adults.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
clinical relevanceHorizontal fusional reserves are used in the diagnosis and monitoring of common vergence disorders, such as convergence insufficiency, which can cause asthenopia and impact near work. Infrared eyetracking technology shows promise for obtaining automated and objective measurements of fusional reserves, expanding options for screening, clinical testing, and at-home monitoring/vision training.
backgroundCurrent clinical tests for fusional reserves rely on subjective judgements made by patients (for diplopia) and clinicians (for eye movements). This paper describes an objective and automated "digital fusion-range test" pilot-tested in adults without current eye disease or binocular vision anomalies. This test combines a consumer-grade infrared eyetracker, a dichoptic display, and custom analyses programs to measure convergence and divergence reserves.
methodsTwenty-nine adult participants completed the study. Horizontal fusional reserves at 55 cm were measured using prism bars and with our computer-based digital fusion-range test. For the digital test, observers viewed dichoptic targets whose binocular disparity modulated over time (at speeds of 0.5, 1.0, or 2.0 Δ/s) while their eye movements were continuously recorded. Subjective reports of break and recovery (by keyboard button press) were compared to objective estimates extracted from eyetracking recordings (via automated analyses).
resultsObjective and subjective measures of break and recovery agreed closely. Clinically small (0.3-2Δ) but statistically significant (p < 0.012) differences were found between measurement types for divergence breaks/recoveries and convergence recoveries. No significant differences were found for convergence breaks (p = 0.11). Such differences are consistent with an average 0.91 (SD 1.66) seconds delay between objective break/recovery and subjective responses. The digital test produced comparable results to the standard clinical prism bar method.
conclusionThe digital fusion-range test supports an automated, reliable assessment of horizontal fusional reserves, which do not depend on subjective responses. This technology may prove useful in a variety of clinical and community-based settings.
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.