ArticlePloS one2024
Assessment of autostereoscopic perception using artificial intelligence-enhanced face tracking technology.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeStereopsis, the ability of humans to perceive depth through distinct visual stimuli in each eye, is foundational to autostereoscopic technology in computing. However, ensuring stable head position during assessments has been challenging. This study evaluated the utility of artificial intelligence (AI)-enhanced face tracking technology in overcoming this challenge by ensuring that each eye consistently receives its intended image.
methodsThe Lume Pad 2, an autostereoscopic tablet with AI-enhanced face tracking, was utilized to simulate quantitative parts of the Stereo Fly test and TNO Stereotests for contour and random dot stereopsis. The study recruited 30 children (14 males and 16 females, mean age of 9.2 ± 0.3 years, age range of 6-12 years) and 30 adults (10 males and 20 females, mean age of 29.4 ± 1.0 years, age range of 21-42 years) to assess the tablet's inter-session reliability. Agreement between conventional and the autostereoscopic tablet-simulated stereotests was tested in a larger group of 181 children (91 males and 90 females, mean age of 9.1 ± 0.4 years, age range of 6-12 years) and 160 adults (69 males and 91 females, mean age of 38.6 ± 2.1 years, age range of 21-65 years). Inter-session reliability and agreement were analyzed using weighted Kappa coefficient and non-parametric Bland-Altman analysis.
resultsThe autostereoscopic tablet demonstrated high inter-session reliability (κ all > 0.80), except for the simulated TNO Stereotest in adults, which demonstrated moderate inter-session reliability (κ = 0.571). Non-parametric Bland-Altman analysis revealed zero median differences, confirming consistent inter-session reliability. Similar patterns were observed in comparing AI-based and conventional methods, with both the weighted Kappa coefficient (κ all > 0.80) and non-parametric Bland-Altman analysis indicating significant agreement. The agreement between methodologies was confirmed by permissible differences, which were smaller than the minimum step range.
conclusionThe integration of AI-based autostereoscopic technology with sub-pixel precision demonstrates significant potential for clinical stereopsis measurements.
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.