ArticleApplied optics2024
Head stabilization apparatus for high-resolution ophthalmic imaging.
Article in Applied optics, 2024. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Repeatability and reliability of retinal arterial hemodynamics measurement using Doppler holography.Journal of biomedical optics · 2026Article
- The fundamentals of eye tracking part 3: How to choose an eye tracker.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Multi-spectral autofluorescence variability of the individual retinal pigmented epithelial cells in healthy aging eyes.Scientific reports · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Head movement must be stabilized to enable high-quality data collection from optical instrumentation such as eye trackers and ophthalmic imaging devices. Though critically important for imaging, head stabilization is often an afterthought in the design of advanced ophthalmic imaging systems, and experimental devices often adapt used and/or discarded equipment from clinical devices for this purpose. Alternatively, those seeking the most stable solution possible, including many users of adaptive optics ophthalmoscopy systems, utilize bite bars. Bite bars can provide excellent stability but are time consuming to fabricate, decreasing imaging efficiency, and uncomfortable for many patients, especially the elderly and/or those with prosthodontics such as dentures who may refuse participation in a study that requires one. No commercial vendors specifically offer head mount solutions for experimental ophthalmic imaging devices, resulting in nearly every custom device having a different solution for this commonly encountered problem. Parallelizing the head stabilization apparatus across different custom devices may improve standardization of experimental imaging systems for clinical trials and other multicenter investigations. Here we introduce a head mount design for ophthalmic imaging that is modular, adjustable, and customizable to the constraints of different experimental imaging configurations. The three points of head contact in our solution provide excellent stabilization across a range of head sizes and shapes from small children to adults, and the ease of adjustment afforded by our design minimizes the time to get participants stabilized and comfortable.
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.