Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Ocular motor disorders
Anna Willard, Christian J Lueck. Current opinion in neurology, 2014-02
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Studying eye movements can provide insight into how the normal brain works, how diseases affect eye movements, and how eye movement abnormalities can be used to study diseases and/or their treatments. In this review, we concentrate on recent studies looking at abnormalities of saccades in various diseases. RECENT FINDINGS: Various saccadic abnormalities have been found in Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, dementia, cerebellar disease, schizophrenia, and several other conditions. In some of these, saccadic abnormalities appear to be capable of distinguishing different subtypes (e.g., progressive supranuclear palsy from idiopathic Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease from frontotemporal dementia, or one type of spinocerebellar ataxia from another). Several studies have looked at functional associations of saccadic abnormalities (e.g., reading in spinocerebellar ataxia or recovery from stroke), which may prove clinically useful. Studies on microsaccades have revealed abnormalities in various diseases, and suggest that they may provide a useful marker of fatigue. SUMMARY: Saccadic eye movements provide an excellent way of studying the human motor system in health and disease, as well as providing insight into various aspects of cognitive function. Assessment of saccades in the laboratory and at the bedside is likely to become increasingly useful clinically.
Key findings
- Studies on microsaccades have revealed abnormalities in various diseases, and suggest that they may provide a useful marker of fatigue.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 38/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Current opinion in neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2014 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 24300789) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 21 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100. |
| Total | 38 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Willard, A., & Lueck, C. J. (2014). Ocular motor disorders. Current opinion in neurology. https://doi.org/10.1097/wco.0000000000000054
Vancouver
Willard A, Lueck CJ. Ocular motor disorders. Current opinion in neurology. 2014. doi:10.1097/wco.0000000000000054. PMID: 24300789.
BibTeX
@article{willard2014-24300789,
author = {Willard, Anna and Lueck, Christian J},
title = {{Ocular motor disorders}},
journal = {Current opinion in neurology},
year = {2014},
doi = {10.1097/wco.0000000000000054},
pmid = {24300789},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1097/wco.0000000000000054}
}
Related studies in Brain scans and imaging
Also in Brain scans and imaging
114 studies in the library are filed under Brain scans and imaging with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Brain scans and imaging hub.