ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Hum. Neurosci.
Sec. Brain Health and Clinical Neuroscience
Volume 19 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2025.1556451
RUNNING HEAD: Clinical Exam -Digital Biomarker Development of Oculomotor Digital Biomarkers using Clinical Examinations as "Ground
Provisionally accepted
- 1East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, United States
- 2RightEye, Bethesda, United States
- 3The Brain Health Center of Maryland, Silver Spring, United States
- 4University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, United Kingdom
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the validity of six computerized eye tracking tests against a clinician-administered oculomotor exam. Method: Fifty-three participants completed the horizontal random saccades (HRS), circular smooth pursuits (CSP), horizontal smooth pursuits (HSP), vertical smooth pursuits (VSP), horizontal saccades (HS), and vertical saccades (VS) oculomotor tests on the computerized system. A board-certified neurologist with 16 years of experience also conducted an oculomotor exam to mirror eye movement patterns.Results: Data analysis included a series of single block logistic regressions to examine the scoring of the six eye tracking tests (RightEye, LLC) to predict clinician-rated eye movement classifications (i.e., normal or abnormal). The computerized battery demonstrated concurrent validity for each of the six oculomotor tests as they significantly predicted the neurologist's classification. The sensitivity and specificity of the six eye-tracking tests ranged from 70.4% to 93.5% and 84.6% to 90.5%, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy of the computerized tests ranged from good (78.8%) to excellent (92.3%). Area Under the Curve analysis for the eye tracking tests yielded a range of 0.734 (VS) to 0.921 (HRS). Conclusion: Results suggest that each of the six computerized eye tracking tests accurately distinguished between normal and abnormal oculomotor movements.
Keywords: eye tracking, oculomotor behavior, digital biomarker, Clinical examination, digital biomarkers
Received: 06 Jan 2025; Accepted: 22 Apr 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Trotter, Hunfalvay, Murray, Mathews and Carrick. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Nicholas P Murray, East Carolina University, Greenville, 27858, North Carolina, United States
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.