ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Comparative Analysis of Physiological Vergence Angle Calculations from Objective Measurements of Gaze Position.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- A Quantitative Evaluation of the PowerRef 3 for Measuring Gaze Position.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
- Measuring eye vergence angle in extended reality.PloS one · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Eccentric photorefractometry is widely used to measure eye refraction, accommodation, gaze position, and pupil size. While the individual calibration of refraction and accommodation data has been extensively studied, gaze measurements have received less attention. PowerRef 3 does not incorporate individual calibration for gaze measurements, resulting in a divergent offset between the measured and expected gaze positions. To address this, we proposed two methods to calculate the physiological vergence angle based on the visual vergence data obtained from PowerRef 3. Twenty-three participants aged 25 ± 4 years viewed Maltese cross stimuli at distances of 25, 30, 50, 70, and 600 cm. The expected vergence angles were calculated considering the individual interpupillary distance at far. Our results demonstrate that the PowerRef 3 gaze data deviated from the expected vergence angles by 9.64 ± 2.73° at 25 cm and 9.25 ± 3.52° at 6 m. The kappa angle calibration method reduced the discrepancy to 3.93 ± 1.19° at 25 cm and 3.70 ± 0.36° at 600 cm, whereas the linear regression method further improved the accuracy to 3.30 ± 0.86° at 25 cm and 0.26 ± 0.01° at 600 cm. Both methods improved the gaze results, with the linear regression calibration method showing greater overall accuracy.
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.