ArticleJournal of vision2025
Metrics of two-dimensional smooth pursuit are diverse across participants and stable across days.
Article in Journal of vision, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Smooth pursuit eye movements are used to volitionally track moving objects, keeping their image near the fovea. Pursuit gain, the ratio of eye to stimulus speed, is used to quantify tracking accuracy and is usually close to 1 for healthy observers. Although previous studies have shown directional asymmetries such as horizontal gain exceeding vertical gain, the temporal stability of these biases and the correlation between oculomotor metrics for tracking in different directions and speeds have not been investigated. Here, in testing sessions 4 to 10 days apart, 45 human observers tracked targets moving along two-dimensional trajectories. Horizontal, vertical, and radial pursuit gain had high test-retest reliability (mean intraclass correlation 0.84). The frequency of all saccades and anticipatory saccades during pursuit also had high test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.66 and 0.73, respectively). In addition, gain metrics showed strong intermetric correlation, and saccade metrics separately showed strong intercorrelation; however, gain and saccade metrics showed only weak intercorrelation. These correlations are likely to originate from a mixture of sensory, motor, and integrative mechanisms. The test-retest reliability of multiple distinct pursuit metrics represents a "pursuit identity" for individuals, but we argue against this ultimately contributing to an oculomotor biomarker.
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.