ArticleJournal of eye movement research2025
Eyes on Prevention: An Eye-Tracking Analysis of Visual Attention Patterns in Breast Cancer Screening Ads.
Article in Journal of eye movement research, 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.
- Eye-Tracked Visual Attention to Anthropomorphic Appearance and Empathic Responses in AI Medical Conversational Agents: Dissociating Trust Gains from Attentional Synergy.Journal of eye movement research · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Strong communication is central to the translation of breast cancer screening availability into uptake. This experiment tests the role of design features of screening advertisements in directing visual attention in screening-eligible women (≥40 years). To this end, a within-subjects eye-tracking experiment (N = 30) was conducted in which women viewed six static public service advertisements. Predefined Areas of Interest (AOIs), Text, Image/Visual, Symbol, Logo, Website/CTA, and Source/Authority-were annotated, and three standard measures were calculated: Time to First Fixation (TTFF), Fixation Count (FC), and Fixation Duration (FD). Analyses combined descriptive summaries with subgroup analyses using nonparametric methods and generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) employing participant-level random intercepts. Within each category of stimuli, detected differences were small in magnitude yet trended towards few revisits in each category for the FC mode; TTFF and FD showed no significant differences across categories. Viewing data from the perspective of Areas of Interest (AOIs) highlighted pronounced individual differences. Narratives/efficacy text and dense icon/text callouts prolonged processing times, although institutional logos and abstract/anatomical symbols generally received brief treatment except when coupled with action-oriented communication triggers. TTFF timing also tended toward individual areas of interest aligned with the Scan-Then-Read strategy, in which smaller labels/sources/CTAs are exploited first in comparison with larger headlines/statistical text. Practically, screening messages should co-locate access and credibility information in early-attention areas and employ brief, fluent efficacy text to hold gaze. The study adds PSA-specific eye-tracking evidence for breast cancer screening and provides immediately testable design recommendations for programs in Greece and the EU.
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.