ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2026
"Look Versus See": Does Varying Fellow Eye Contrast Affect Perception of the Amblyopic Eye?
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2026. 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.
- Differential Fixation and Eye Alignment Patterns in Strabismus with and Without Amblyopia Across Viewing Conditions.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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate how modulating fellow eye (FE) contrast during dichoptic visual search impacts amblyopic eye (AE) perception and oculomotor behavior in amblyopia. By leveraging eye-tracking data, we investigated how FE contrast and sensory-motor factors influence perceptual outcomes, distinguishing successful attentional allocation and target identification ("look and see") from "look but failed to see" (LBFTS) and "no look, no see" errors. Methods: All participants performed visual search under monocular and dichoptic viewing with varied FE contrasts. High-resolution eye-tracking captured microsaccades (<1°), saccades (>1°), drift velocity, eye deviation via the density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise algorithm (DBSCAN) and attention patterns (heatmaps, scan paths). Search efficiency was measured as the time from image onset to the final fixation within the region of interest (look time), and perceptual accuracy was assessed via mouse-click localization of the target. Results: In amblyopic participants, full-contrast FE dichoptic viewing impaired AE target detection and prolonged look time. Reducing FE contrast improved AE performance-especially in those with mild suppression and good stereopsis-by shortening look time and reducing LBFTS errors. However, excessive FE contrast reduction (≤25%) impaired FE target detection in controls and amblyopia participants. The "look and see" trials showed higher microsaccade frequency, whereas LBFTS and "no look, no see" (i.e., incorrect) trials were linked to increased saccades, eye deviation, and increased FE drift. Conclusions: Contrast rebalancing can enhance AE attentional and perceptual performance, but optimal FE contrast varies with individual sensory-motor profiles. Our findings underscore the value of integrating visual search paradigms with eye tracking to personalize dichoptic therapies and objectively monitor treatment efficacy.
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.