Validity of Low-resolution Eye-tracking to Assess Eye Movements During a Rapid Number Naming Task: Performance of the Eyetribe Eye Tracker

Overview

Journal Brain Inj

Publisher Informa Healthcare

Specialty Neurology

Date 2017 Dec 7

PMID 29211506

Citations 7

Authors

Jenelle Raynowska

John-Ross Rizzo

Janet C Rucker

Weiwei Dai

Joel Birkemeier

Julian Hershowitz

Ivan Selesnick

Laura J Balcer

Steven L Galetta

Todd Hudson

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the performance of the EyeTribe compared to the EyeLink for eye movement recordings during a rapid number naming test in healthy control participants.

Background: With the increasing accessibility of portable, economical, video-based eye trackers such as the EyeTribe, there is growing interest in these devices for eye movement recordings, particularly in the domain of sports-related concussion. However, prior to implementation there is a primary need to establish the validity of these devices. One current limitation of portable eye trackers is their sampling rate (30-60 samples per second, or Hz), which is typically well below the benchmarks achieved by their research-grade counterparts (e.g., the EyeLink, which samples at 500-2000 Hz).

Methods: We compared video-oculographic measurements made using the EyeTribe with those of the EyeLink during a digitized rapid number naming task (the King-Devick test) in a convenience sample of 30 controls.

Results: EyeTribe had loss of signal during recording, and failed to reproduce the typical shape of saccadic main sequence relationships. In addition, EyeTribe data yielded significantly fewer detectable saccades and displayed greater variance of inter-saccadic intervals than the EyeLink system.

Conclusion: Caution is advised prior to implementation of low-resolution eye trackers for objective saccade assessment and sideline concussion screening.

Citing Articles

Navigating the U.S. regulatory landscape for neurologic digital health technologies.

Busis N, Marolia D, Montgomery R, Balcer L, Galetta S, Grossman S NPJ Digit Med. 2024; 7(1):94.

PMID: 38609447 PMC: 11014948. DOI: 10.1038/s41746-024-01098-5.

Assessing the data quality of AdHawk MindLink eye-tracking glasses.

Huang Z, Duan X, Zhu G, Zhang S, Wang R, Wang Z Behav Res Methods. 2024; 56(6):5771-5787.

PMID: 38168041 DOI: 10.3758/s13428-023-02310-2.

Evaluation and Utility of the King-Devick With Integrated Eye Tracking as a Diagnostic Tool for Sport-Related Concussion.

Hecimovich M, Murphy M, Chivers P, Stock P Orthop J Sports Med. 2022; 10(12):23259671221142255.

PMID: 36582931 PMC: 9793019. DOI: 10.1177/23259671221142255.

Eye tracking: empirical foundations for a minimal reporting guideline.

Holmqvist K, Orbom S, Hooge I, Niehorster D, Alexander R, Andersson R Behav Res Methods. 2022; 55(1):364-416.

PMID: 35384605 PMC: 9535040. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-021-01762-8.

GazeBase, a large-scale, multi-stimulus, longitudinal eye movement dataset.

Griffith H, Lohr D, Abdulin E, Komogortsev O Sci Data. 2021; 8(1):184.

PMID: 34272404 PMC: 8285447. DOI: 10.1038/s41597-021-00959-y.

References

Wierts R, Janssen M, Kingma H . Measuring saccade peak velocity using a low-frequency sampling rate of 50 Hz. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2009; 55(12):2840-2. DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2008.925290. View

Galetta K, Barrett J, Allen M, Madda F, Delicata D, Tennant A . The King-Devick test as a determinant of head trauma and concussion in boxers and MMA fighters. Neurology. 2011; 76(17):1456-62. PMC: 3087467. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e31821184c9. View

Heitger M, Jones R, Dalrymple-Alford J, Frampton C, Ardagh M, Anderson T . Motor deficits and recovery during the first year following mild closed head injury. Brain Inj. 2006; 20(8):807-24. DOI: 10.1080/02699050600676354. View

Rizzo J, Hudson T, Dai W, Birkemeier J, Pasculli R, Selesnick I . Rapid number naming in chronic concussion: eye movements in the King-Devick test. Ann Clin Transl Neurol. 2016; 3(10):801-811. PMC: 5048390. DOI: 10.1002/acn3.345. View

Rizzo J, Hudson T, Dai W, Desai N, Yousefi A, Palsana D . Objectifying eye movements during rapid number naming: Methodology for assessment of normative data for the King-Devick test. J Neurol Sci. 2016; 362:232-9. PMC: 4821571. DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2016.01.045. View

Kimmel D, Mammo D, Newsome W . Tracking the eye non-invasively: simultaneous comparison of the scleral search coil and optical tracking techniques in the macaque monkey. Front Behav Neurosci. 2012; 6:49. PMC: 3418577. DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2012.00049. View

Maruta J, Suh M, Niogi S, Mukherjee P, Ghajar J . Visual tracking synchronization as a metric for concussion screening. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2010; 25(4):293-305. DOI: 10.1097/HTR.0b013e3181e67936. View

Galetta M, Galetta K, McCrossin J, Wilson J, Moster S, Galetta S . Saccades and memory: baseline associations of the King-Devick and SCAT2 SAC tests in professional ice hockey players. J Neurol Sci. 2013; 328(1-2):28-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2013.02.008. View

King D, Brughelli M, Hume P, Gissane C . Concussions in amateur rugby union identified with the use of a rapid visual screening tool. J Neurol Sci. 2013; 326(1-2):59-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2013.01.012. View

10.

Ramat S, Leigh R, Zee D, Optican L . What clinical disorders tell us about the neural control of saccadic eye movements. Brain. 2006; 130(Pt 1):10-35. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awl309. View

11.

Galetta K, Brandes L, Maki K, Dziemianowicz M, Laudano E, Allen M . The King-Devick test and sports-related concussion: study of a rapid visual screening tool in a collegiate cohort. J Neurol Sci. 2011; 309(1-2):34-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2011.07.039. View

12.

Felleman D, Van Essen D . Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex. Cereb Cortex. 1991; 1(1):1-47. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/1.1.1-a. View

13.

Sussman E, Ho A, Pendharkar A, Ghajar J . Clinical evaluation of concussion: the evolving role of oculomotor assessments. Neurosurg Focus. 2016; 40(4):E7. DOI: 10.3171/2016.1.FOCUS15610. View

14.

Galetta K, Liu M, Leong D, Ventura R, Galetta S, Balcer L . The King-Devick test of rapid number naming for concussion detection: meta-analysis and systematic review of the literature. Concussion. 2018; 1(2):CNC8. PMC: 6114024. DOI: 10.2217/cnc.15.8. View

15.

van der Geest J, Frens M . Recording eye movements with video-oculography and scleral search coils: a direct comparison of two methods. J Neurosci Methods. 2002; 114(2):185-95. DOI: 10.1016/s0165-0270(01)00527-1. View

16.

Niehorster D, Cornelissen T, Holmqvist K, Hooge I, Hessels R . What to expect from your remote eye-tracker when participants are unrestrained. Behav Res Methods. 2017; 50(1):213-227. PMC: 5809535. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-017-0863-0. View

17.

Cifu D, Wares J, Hoke K, Wetzel P, Gitchel G, Carne W . Differential eye movements in mild traumatic brain injury versus normal controls. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2014; 30(1):21-8. DOI: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000036. View

18.

Samadani U, Li M, Qian M, Laska E, Ritlop R, Kolecki R . Sensitivity and specificity of an eye movement tracking-based biomarker for concussion. Concussion. 2018; 1(1):CNC3. PMC: 6114025. DOI: 10.2217/cnc.15.3. View

19.

McCamy M, Otero-Millan J, Leigh R, King S, Schneider R, Macknik S . Simultaneous recordings of human microsaccades and drifts with a contemporary video eye tracker and the search coil technique. PLoS One. 2015; 10(6):e0128428. PMC: 4452707. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128428. View