ArticlePloS one2025
Eye-tracking as a measure of receptive vocabulary in non-verbal children with cerebral palsy.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Children with cerebral palsy (CP) often struggle to participate in traditional language assessments due to their limited mobility, making it challenging for speech-language therapists (SLTs) to accurately assess their language abilities. In recent years, there has been evidence that eye-tracking is an effective way of measuring the receptive language abilities of children who demonstrate difficulties with traditional language assessments. This study aimed to (i) develop eye-tracking assessment materials based on a receptive vocabulary subtest of a Malay language assessment and (ii) evaluate the performance of children with CP on the receptive vocabulary assessment conducted via eye-tracking, compared to their performance on a traditional receptive vocabulary assessment. The first phase of the study focused on developing eye-tracking receptive vocabulary assessment materials from the Malay Preschool Language Assessment Tool and trialling the materials and assessment protocol. This phase involved 15 typically developing children aged 4-6 years. The finalized materials and protocol were administered to 15 children with CP in the second phase. Each child attended two assessment sessions: the first was a traditional receptive vocabulary assessment, and the second utilized eye-tracking technology. Children practiced eye-tracking through online games. Results showed that eight children with CP performed better in the eye-tracking assessment, two scored similarly across both methods, and five scored lower during eye-tracking. The Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test conducted revealed no significant difference in scores across both assessment methods (p > .05). Furthermore, most children exhibited poor consistency in their scores across the two methods. These findings suggest that while some children with CP may benefit from receptive vocabulary assessments conducted via eye-tracking, no single assessment method is optimal for all children with CP. Instead, children with CP may benefit from a combination of assessment methods, including eye-tracking, to increase the accuracy of assessment results.
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.