ArticleJournal of vision2025
Eye tracking for the classification of visual function in individuals with vision impairment: A validation in Para athletes.
Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Evaluating lawful relationships in saccadic eye movements with simulated vision impairment: A proof-of-concept study.Journal of vision · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Eye tracking has the potential to be used as a meaningful measure of the consequences of vision impairment (VI), yet a comprehensive test battery is lacking. In this study, we sought to evaluate the feasibility and validity of a test battery of eye movements as a tool to measure visual performance in individuals with VI. A test battery including fixation stability, smooth pursuit, saccades, free viewing, and visual search was administered to 46 athletes with VI and 10 control participants. Feasibility was determined by test completion rates. Construct validity was assessed by comparing eye movement outcomes across different VI subgroups, and predictive validity was evaluated by examining the relationship between eye movement metrics and in-competition sport performance. The test battery proved feasible, with 88% of athletes with VI able to complete the tests. Eye movement variables distinguished between subgroups, supporting construct validity. For example, participants with combined central and peripheral vision loss showed longer fixation durations during free viewing and visual search, while those with central vision loss had prolonged saccades during free viewing and fewer and smaller eye movements during visual search. Predictive validity was indicated by significant correlations between eye movement metrics and sport performance, suggesting that eye tracking can predict real-world outcomes. Our findings suggest that an assessment of eye movements provides a feasible, valid, and largely objective measure of the functional consequences of VI that may extend beyond what information is obtained using traditional tests of visual acuity and visual field and that those measures can help to predict the sport performance of Para athletes.
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.