Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41888985›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2026

Eye-tracking-derived foveal biomarkers and functional alterations in dry AMD: findings from a controlled clinical study.

Bjørn André Helland-Hansen, Alexander Sverstad, Goran Petrovski, Stig Einride Larsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Bjørn André Helland-HansenCentre for Eye Research and Innovative Diagnostics, Department of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Oslo, 0424, Norway. eyeresearch@run.box.
Alexander SverstadCentre for Eye Research and Innovative Diagnostics, Department of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Oslo, 0424, Norway.
Goran Petrovski *Centre for Eye Research and Innovative Diagnostics, Department of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Oslo, 0424, Norway.
Stig Einride Larsen *Meddoc Research, Hvamstubben 14, Skjetten, 2013, Norway.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 333925
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAge-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of vision loss in the elderly, and early detection is essential for timely intervention and slowing disease progression. This study validated novel foveal function tests using the Bulbicam (BCAM) device for differentiating early and intermediate dry AMD from healthy controls (HCs) and to identify functional variables that may serve as candidate biomarkers.

methodsIn a controlled clinical study, 17 patients with early and intermediate dry AMD and 17 age-matched HCs were assessed using the proprietary Bulbitech “ACOLAPT” (Acuity, Contrast, Light Adaptation) test. Each eye was classified as either the “Worst eye” or “Best eye” for AMD patients based on predefined clinical criteria. Foveal function metrics were derived from the five main variables: Pursuit acuity (PuAc), Pursuit contrast sensitivity (PuCS), Strobe Pursuit Contrast Sensitivity(StCS), (PuCS − StCS) / PuCS (ΔCS), and Variable Strobe Pursuit Object Detection(VaSt). Test validity, reliability, repeatability, and stability were assessed. Validation of ACOLAPT included Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses to assess discriminative capacity, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots with Agreement Index (AI) to evaluate reliability and Stability Index (SI) for estimation of stability.

resultsAll five BCAM tests showed significant differences between AMD patients and HCs in the worst eye (p ≤ 0.05). PuAc and PuCS showed good reliability (ICC ≥ 0.77), good repeatability (AI ≥ 0.75), and excellent stability (SI ≥ 0.59). The novel StCS test demonstrated excellent reliability (ICC = 0.96), excellent repeatability (AI = 0.88), and excellent stability (SI = 0.58). Despite good ICC values, VaSt and ΔCS had lower repeatability (AI ≤ 0.25), highlighting the importance of AI and SI metrics.

conclusionPuAc, PuCS, and StCS fulfilled the predefined criteria for reliability, repeatability, and stability, supporting their use as candidate biomarkers at both population and individual patient levels. VaSt also met the predefined biomarker criteria through preserved cross-session stability despite lower single-trial agreement. ACOLAPT’s ability to assess multiple aspects of foveal function, along with enhanced stability and repeatability metrics, suggests that it could be valuable in clinical settings for early AMD detection and monitoring.

Indexed as

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD)Agreement Index (AI)Contrast sensitivityDynamic visual testingFoveal adaptationFoveal functionIntraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC)Luminance adaptationRetinal biomarkersStability Index (SI)Visual acuity

Identifiers

PMID41888985
PMCPMC13147856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.