ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Cancellation of the vestibulo-ocular reflex during smooth pursuit in patients with maculopathy.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Macular degeneration is associated with loss of central vision, including the fovea. Central visual field loss is associated with impaired smooth pursuit eye movements, and the associated scotoma can lead to target disappearance which may or may not be transient. While smooth pursuit in and of itself does not require a foveal position signal, suppression of the vestibuloocular reflex (VOR) needed during combined eye and head pursuit relies on the fovea for appropriate calibration. Prior work has shown that target extinction during, or even at the beginning of the trial does not affect the dynamics of the eye or head responses necessary for pursuit. These findings suggest that the potential disappearance of the target into the scotoma during pursuit can be overcome, particularly when both eye and head movements are used. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that head-unrestrained smooth pursuit deficits in CFL are at least partially related to individuals' inability to cancel their VOR. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a previously published data set of head restrained and unrestrained pursuit of a 10 °/s target in 7 individuals with maculopathy (56-89 years) and 7 age-matched controls (61-78 years). We used a two-parameter linear regression model to quantify the eye-only pursuit (K Results: We observed reduced pursuit velocities in the head-unrestrained versus restrained smooth pursuit condition (K Discussion: We confirmed that VOR responses to actively generated head movements were similarly intact in both groups. Our analyses of the pursuit data indicate that, regardless of visual function older adults attenuate eye-driven pursuit when the head is unrestrained (as compared to the restrained condition), and those with CFL fail to exploit residual VOR cancellation, helping to explain their persistent gaze-tracking deficits.
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.