ArticleEpilepsy & behavior : E&B2024
Novelty preference assessed by eye tracking: A sensitive measure of impaired recognition memory in epilepsy.
Article in Epilepsy & behavior : E&B, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predicting post-surgical visuospatial memory performance in people with drug-resistant epilepsy.Epileptic disorders : international epilepsy journal with videotape · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveEpilepsy patients often report memory deficits despite normal objective testing, suggesting that available measures are insensitive or that non-mnemonic factors are involved. The Visual Paired Comparison Task (VPCT) assesses novelty preference, the tendency to fixate on novel images rather than previously viewed items, requiring recognition memory for the "old" images. As novelty preference is a sensitive measure of hippocampal-dependent memory function, we predicted impaired VPCT performance in epilepsy patients compared to healthy controls.
methodsWe assessed 26 healthy adult controls and 31 epilepsy patients (16 focal-onset, 13 generalized-onset, 2 unknown-onset) with the VPCT using delays of 2 or 30 s between encoding and recognition. Fifteen healthy controls and 17 epilepsy patients (10 focal-onset, 5 generalized-onset, 2 unknown-onset) completed the task at 2-, 5-, and 30-minute delays. Subjects also performed standard memory measures, including the Medical College of Georgia (MCG) Paragraph Test, California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition (CVLT-II), and Brief Visual Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R).
resultsThe epilepsy group was high functioning, with greater estimated IQ (p = 0.041), greater years of education (p = 0.034), and higher BVMT-R scores (p = 0.024) compared to controls. Both the control group and epilepsy cohort, as well as focal- and generalized-onset subgroups, had intact novelty preference at the 2- and 30-second delays (p-values ≤ 0.001) and declined at 30 min (p-values > 0.05). Only the epilepsy patients had early declines at 2- and 5-minute delays (controls with intact novelty preference at p = 0.003 and p ≤ 0.001, respectively; epilepsy groups' p-values > 0.05).
conclusionsMemory for the "old" items decayed more rapidly in overall, focal-onset, and generalized-onset epilepsy groups. The VPCT detected deficits while standard memory measures were largely intact, suggesting that the VPCT may be a more sensitive measure of temporal lobe memory function than standard neuropsychological batteries.
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.