ArticleScientific reports2024
Quantifying attention in children with intellectual and developmental disabilities through multicenter electrooculogram signal analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Hashimoto's thyroiditis and nanophthalmos in Gabriele-de Vries syndrome: a case report.Frontiers in endocrinology · 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In a multicenter case-control investigation, we assessed the efficacy of the Electrooculogram Signal Analysis (EOG-SA) method, which integrates attention-related visual evocation, electrooculography, and nonlinear analysis, for distinguishing between intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and typical development (TD) in children. Analyzing 127 participants (63 IDD, 64 TD), we applied nonlinear dynamics for feature extraction. Results indicated EOG-SA's capability to distinguish IDD, with higher template thresholds and Correlation Dimension values correlating with clinical severity. The template threshold proved a robust indicator, with higher values denoting severe IDD. Discriminative metrics showed areas under the curve of 0.91 (template threshold) and 0.85/0.91 (D2), with sensitivities and specificities of 77.6%/95.9% and 93.5%/71.0%, respectively. EOG-SA emerges as a promising tool, offering interpretable neural biomarkers for early and nuanced diagnosis of IDD.
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.