ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2026
Differences in Preferred Retinal Loci of Fixation in Binocular and Monocular Vision.
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. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Fixational eye movements (FEMs) are critical for visual perception, yet their precise coordination during binocular viewing remains poorly understood at the microscopic retinal level. This study aimed to quantify differences in fixation stability and the spatial location of the preferred retinal locus (PRL) between monocular and binocular viewing conditions. Methods: Using a custom binocular scanning laser ophthalmoscope, we recorded high-resolution FEM sequences in 10 healthy subjects under monocular and binocular viewing. Fixation stability was evaluated using the non-parametric isoline contour area (ISOA). A permutation-based statistical framework was applied to account for the strong sample-to-sample correlation in high-speed eye-tracking data. Results: Results show that binocular viewing yields significantly smaller ISOA values compared to monocular viewing (P < 0.001), indicating a binocular advantage in fixation stability. This advantage is driven by a concurrent tightening of both components of fixational eye movements: smaller microsaccade amplitudes (median, 10.04 arcmin vs. 8.11 arcmin; P = 0.0098) and less dispersive drift (P ≤ 0.0039 across time lags of 33-833 ms). Furthermore, we identified systematic, yet individual, intra-subject spatial shifts of the PRL (∆PRL mean, 3.19 ± 2.20 arcmin) upon binocular viewing, which were predominantly driven by a disconjugate micro-vergence. Conclusions: Binocular viewing not only enhances oculomotor stability through smaller microsaccades and tighter drift but also actively shifts fixation to a different retinal location compared to monocular viewing. The visual system appears to tolerate objective vergence errors of several arcminutes to enable solving the binocular correspondence problem.
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.