ArticleScientific reports2025
Visual field-based reaction time as a novel indicator for early detection of mild cognitive impairment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
Early detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is vital for timely intervention to delay or prevent progression to dementia. Gaze behavior analysis has been shown to differentiate individuals with MCI from cognitively healthy older adults. This study aimed to examine visual processing differences between cognitively healthy older adults and those with MCI, focusing on central and Useful Field of View (UFOV) tasks. Participants completed a central visual field task and a UFOV task. Reaction times, omission and commission errors, and visual orienting frequency were measured. Group comparisons were conducted. For variables showing significant differences, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis evaluated discriminatory accuracy and optimal cutoff values. No significant group differences emerged in the central task. In the UFOV task, patients with MCI demonstrated significantly slower reaction times than controls. The optimal UFOV reaction time cutoff was 598.1 ms, with 90.3% sensitivity, 72.1% specificity, and an area under the curve of 0.841. Older adults with MCI exhibit delayed visual processing under UFOV conditions. Reaction time in the UFOV task may serve as a sensitive, practical behavioral marker for early MCI detection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.