ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Cognitive Vergence and Pupillary Responses as Functional Oculomotor Signatures to Differentiate AT(N) Biological Profiles.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The AT(N) biological framework classifies Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology using CSF biomarkers, with the A+T+ profile defining biological AD and the A-T+ profile representing a biologically distinct entity consistent with suspected non-Alzheimer's pathophysiology, such as primary age-related tauopathy. Functional assessment capable of differentiating these profiles non-invasively remains limited. This study investigates whether cognitive vergence and pupillary temporal dynamics during a visual oddball task can distinguish A-T+ from A+T+ biological profiles in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods: Thirty-eight participants with MCI (12 A-T+, 26 A+T+) classified by CSF biomarkers completed a visual oddball task (80% distractors, 20% targets) under continuous eye-tracking. Linear mixed-effects models examined profile × condition interactions on full time series and six trial-level temporal features. Participant-level differentiation was assessed using binomial logistic regression, adjusting for age, sex, and MMSE. Results: Both profiles showed comparable overall oculomotor response magnitudes but diverged markedly in temporal organization. Significant profile × condition interactions emerged for cognitive vergence global slope, time to peak, and pupillary time to peak. Logistic regression confirmed that timing features discriminated biological profiles at the participant level, with differentiation reversing direction between distractor and target conditions. A-T+ participants also maintained superior target detection accuracy (89.3% vs. 82.4%, p = 0.001). Conclusion: Cognitive Vergence and pupillary temporal dynamics during an oddball task provide condition-dependent functional oculomotor signatures that systematically differentiate AT(N) biological profiles in MCI, suggesting that oculomotor assessment may offer an accessible, non-invasive complement to CSF-based profile characterization.
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.