Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41476954›Full record

ReviewAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Eye tracking as a diagnostic tool in Alzheimer's disease, mild cognitive impairment, and related dementias: a systematic review.

Gustavo Luis Verón, Gustavo Ezequiel Juantorena, Greta Keller, Lucía Crivelli, Juan Esteban Kamienkowski

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Gustavo Luis VerónLaboratorio de Inteligencia Artificial Aplicada (LIAA), Instituto de Ciencias de la Computación (ICC), Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales Universidad de Buenos Aires-Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (UBA-CONICET) Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires Argentina.
Gustavo Ezequiel JuantorenaLaboratorio de Inteligencia Artificial Aplicada (LIAA), Instituto de Ciencias de la Computación (ICC), Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales Universidad de Buenos Aires-Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (UBA-CONICET) Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires Argentina.
Greta KellerDepartment of Cognitive Neurology Fleni Buenos Aires Argentina.
Lucía CrivelliDepartment of Cognitive Neurology Fleni Buenos Aires Argentina.
Juan Esteban KamienkowskiLaboratorio de Inteligencia Artificial Aplicada (LIAA), Instituto de Ciencias de la Computación (ICC), Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales Universidad de Buenos Aires-Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (UBA-CONICET) Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires Argentina.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5725-6539

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology begins years before symptoms emerge, making early detection essential. Eye tracking offers a rapid, non-invasive means of identifying early cognitive decline through oculomotor disturbances. This Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)- and Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO)-guided systematic review evaluated studies from PubMed, ACM Digital Library, and Google Scholar on eye tracking in mild cognitive impairment (MCI), AD, and related dementias. Seventy-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Antisaccade tasks consistently distinguished AD and MCI from healthy controls, with impaired accuracy, longer latencies, and reduced gain. Non-saccadic paradigms (e.g., visual search, free viewing) indicated diminished exploratory behavior in AD, with mixed findings in MCI. A major limitation was the lack of cohorts defined by current biological criteria, hindering clinical translation. In a subset, classical machine-learning (ML) models and deep neural networks reported accuracies of 0.72 to 0.97. Overall, antisaccade tasks show strong promise for early AD screening; future work should adopt biologically defined cohorts and scalable, accessible eye-tracking technologies. Highlights: Antisaccade tasks best distinguish AD and MCI from HCs.Visual search/free-view tasks showed diminished exploratory behavior in AD.Most studies lack biomarker-based AD criteria, creating a major research gap.

Indexed as

Alzheimer's diseaseantisaccade taskearly detectioneye trackingmild cognitive impairmentprosaccade tasksystematic review

Identifiers

PMID41476954
PMCPMC12750316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.