ArticleBrain communications2025
Saccades track visual associative memory processes with precision and sensitivity.
Article in Brain communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Visual attention and postural stability among older adults participating in health-enhancing physical activity: a systematic review.Frontiers in network physiology · 2026Pooled it
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
Abstract
Humans primarily use vision to engage with and learn about the world. The hippocampus plays a crucial role in binding visual experiences of people, objects and contexts over time to create event memories. Thus, eye tracking could read out hippocampal dynamics in a precise and sensitive manner. Furthermore, eye tracking could potentially detect subjective memory decline reported by temporal lobe epilepsy patients that is missed by standardized cognitive testing. We asked whether eye movements could precisely and sensitively detect memory variability within trials and between subject cohorts. We predicted that (i) eye-tracking behaviour during visual retrieval could be validated against accuracy-based tests and that (ii) memory failures would be characterized by distinct spatiotemporal patterns of visual scanning. Fourteen healthy controls and 30 temporal lobe epilepsy patients participated in a visual object association task while eye movements and pupil size were recorded. We found a difference in accuracy during retrieval between healthy controls and temporal lobe epilepsy patients. Correct retrieval trials correlated with fewer saccades, early target preference, and a more organized search pattern. Eye-movement patterns could predict retrieval accuracy at the single trial level with outstanding performance, with percentage of gaze time on the target versus the lure as the most important features. Even during correct retrieval trials, temporal lobe epilepsy patients exhibited a more chaotic scanning pattern compared to healthy controls, suggesting a weaker memory trace. Healthy versus epilepsy diagnosis could be predicted with good performance, with trial entropy and pupillary changes as key predictive factors. Saccade patterns correlated with individual subjects' accuracy scores and performance on standardized cognitive tests but provided a greater range of performance. In summary, scanning behaviour provides a continuous measure of associative memory function that capture meaningful variability during trials, between trials, and between subjects. Thus, eye tracking could be a precise and sensitive method to detect subtle memory decline in temporal lobe epilepsy or other neuropsychiatric populations with memory impairment and may generate precise behavioural phenotyping in research settings.
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.