ReviewBrain sciences2025
Eye-Tracking Metrics as a Digital Biomarker for Neurocognitive Disorders in Multiple Sclerosis: A Scoping Review.
Review in Brain sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Eye-Tracking Technologies for Cognitive Assessment After Acquired Brain Injury: Systematic Review.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2026Review
- Baseline Oculomotor Parameters Are Prospectively Associated with Cognitive Processing Speed at 6-Year Follow-Up in Multiple Sclerosis: An Exploratory Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A Feasibility Study of Tablet-Based Eye Movement Assessment Using a Built-In Camera: A Pilot Study.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
- Quantitative Analysis of Smooth Pursuit and Saccadic Eye Movements in Multiple Sclerosis.Neurology international · 2026Article
- Advances in ocular motor and pupil biomarkers for neurological disorders.Brain communications · 2026Review
- Objective speech measures capture depressive symptoms and associated cognitive difficulties.Translational psychiatry · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune disease classified as neurodegenerative because it can be associated with the more or less progressive development of neurological symptoms and cognitive deficits. In recent years, various studies have started to investigate eye movements in relation to cognitive impairment in persons with MS by means of eye-tracking equipment. However, the high heterogeneity of the paradigms used in different studies, as well as the different methodologies included, makes it difficult to provide a complete and precise picture of this important research and clinical issue. The purpose of the present in-depth scoping review was to map the existing literature in this field to determine which metrics may be relevant when dealing with the neurocognitive profile of people with MS. From the analyses of the included studies, the anti-saccade latency and errors were the most frequently proposed metrics. Correlation analyses between these metrics and cognitive measures showed significant associations between them, calling for a deeper investigation of this promising research and clinical field. The results of the present scoping review strongly suggest that eye tracking may play a crucial role in clinical practice during the early detection of neurocognitive disorders. There is a great need for primary research that addresses the full complexity of MS in its different phenotypes and the disease-related variables from a multidisciplinary perspective. Future research should clarify whether oculomotor dysfunction in MS follows or precedes cognitive deficits.
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.