ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Eye tracking for classification of concussion in adults and pediatrics.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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.
- Detecting Feigned Pain Using an Eye-Tracker Integrated Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS).Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025Trial
- Objective Markers for Diagnosing Concussions: Beyond Blood Biomarkers and the Role of Real-Time Diagnostic Tools.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Optimal Diagnostic Strategies for Concussion-Related Vision Disorders: A Review.Eye and brain · 2025Review
- Detecting hidden brain injuries.Nature · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In order to obtain FDA Marketing Authorization for aid in the diagnosis of concussion, an eye tracking study in an intended use population was conducted. Methods: Potentially concussed subjects recruited in emergency department and concussion clinic settings prospectively underwent eye tracking and a subset of the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 3 at 6 sites. The results of an eye tracking-based classifier model were then validated against a pre-specified algorithm with a cutoff for concussed vs. non-concussed. The sensitivity and specificity of eye tracking were calculated after plotting of the receiver operating characteristic curve and calculation of the AUC (area under curve). Results: When concussion is defined by SCAT3 subsets, the sensitivity and specificity of an eye tracking algorithm was 80.4 and 66.1%, The AUC was 0.718. The misclassification rate ( Conclusion: A pre-specified algorithm and cutoff for diagnosis of concussion vs. non-concussion has a sensitivity and specificity that is useful as a baseline-free aid in diagnosis of concussion. Eye tracking has potential to serve as an objective "gold-standard" for detection of neurophysiologic disruption due to brain injury.
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.