ArticleExperimental brain research2024
Assessing inter-ocular fixational eye movements throughout the lifespan.
Article in Experimental brain research, 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.
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Strabismus with and without Amblyopia from Fixation Eye Movements.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Differential Fixation and Eye Alignment Patterns in Strabismus with and Without Amblyopia Across Viewing Conditions.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
- A Multihead Attention Deep Learning Algorithm to Detect Amblyopia Using Fixation Eye Movements.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
This study aims to assess fixational eye movements (FEMs) obtained under binocular and monocular viewing in normal individuals across different age groups. We recruited 68 healthy participants divided into Group 1 (children, 3-9 years, n = 20), Group 2 (adolescents, 10-19 years, n = 26), and Group 3 (adults, 20-73 years, n = 22). FEMs were collected using a high-resolution video-based tracker under 3 viewing conditions: binocular viewing (BV), monocular viewing right eye (MV_RE), and monocular viewing left eye (MV_LE). We quantified fixation stability, the frequency, amplitude, and disconjugacy of fixational saccades, and inter-saccadic drift velocity in BV, MV_RE, and MV_LE. We also computed inter-ocular fixation stability under binocular viewing and monocular viewing in the 3 groups. Fixation instability (FI) and fixational saccade amplitudes were higher in Group 1 than in Group 3 whereas inter-saccadic drifts were increased in Group 3. Vergence stability was greater in binocular viewing than in monocular viewing likely due to binocular summation in all groups. However, the fixational saccade amplitude and drift velocity of the right and left eye did not significantly differ across different viewing conditions within each group. Interestingly, the inter-ocular fixation stability ratio and vergence stability showed no significant differences between the groups. In conclusion, FEMs differ across age groups but inter-ocular FEMs are immune to the effects of age and can be a valuable parameter while evaluating FEM abnormalities in diseases like amblyopia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39395061What 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.