ArticleCureus2024
Development of Automated Visual Acuity Measurement Using a Calibration-Free Eye-Tracking System.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of a Novel Autostereoscopic Three-Dimensional System for Binocular Visual Function: A Comparative Validation Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A Novel Eye Tracking-Based Gamified Assessment of Contrast Sensitivity Function in Children: Prospective Development and Reliability Study.JMIR serious games · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose Infant vision assessment often relies on grating acuity; however, its objectivity and convenience must be improved. A calibration-free eye-tracking system, even in preverbal children, enables easy and precise gaze analysis. This pilot study aimed to develop a reliable automated monocular vision screening. Methods Participants (n=118) underwent a grating visual acuity test using the eye-tracking system. Correlations between the grating acuity, uncorrected visual acuity, and refractive error were analyzed across different cutoff values of fixation duration percentage. Results Strong correlations were found between the grating acuity and refractive error at 69% and 88% thresholds. Similar correlations with uncorrected visual acuity were noted at 70% and 89% thresholds. False-negatives around the 70% threshold were noted, indicating potential overestimation of acuity in cases of low visual acuity/high refractive error. Discussion The results highlight the feasibility of calibration-free eye-tracking system-based monocular vision screening with an optimal screening threshold of 90%.
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.