Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39877930›Full record

ArticleJournal of eye movement research2024

Computational approaches to apply the String Edit Algorithm to create accurate visual scan paths.

Ricardo Palma Fraga, Ziho Kang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of eye movement research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ricardo Palma FragaUniversity of Oklahoma, USA.
Ziho KangUniversity of Oklahoma, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Eye movement detection algorithms (e.g., I-VT) require the selection of thresholds to identify eye fixations and saccadic movements from gaze data. The choice of threshold is important, as thresholds too low or large may fail to accurately identify eye fixations and saccades. An inaccurate threshold might also affect the resulting visual scan path, the time-ordered sequence of eye fixations and saccades, carried out by the participant. Commonly used approaches to evaluate threshold accuracy can be manually laborious, or require information about the expected visual scan paths of participants, which might not be available. To address this issue, we propose two different computational approaches, labeled as "between-participants comparisons" and "within-participants comparisons." The approaches were evaluated using the open-source Gazebase dataset, which contained a bullseyetarget tracking task, where participants were instructed to follow the movements of a bullseye-target. The predetermined path of the bullseye-target enabled us to evaluate our proposed approaches against the expected visual scan path. The approaches identified threshold values (220°/s and 210°/s) that were 83% similar to the expected visual scan path, outperforming a 30°/s benchmark threshold (41.5%). These methods might assist researchers in identifying accurate threshold values for the IVT algorithm or potentially other eye movement detection algorithms.

Indexed as

algorithmseye movementeye trackinggazescan paththresholds

Identifiers

PMID39877930
PMCPMC11714258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.