ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences2026
Diagnostic value of saccades in mild cognitive impairment: a community-based study.
Article in The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- High myopia extends beyond a refractive error: evidence from fixation stability and reading-related saccadic eye movements.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Integrating memory-guided saccades and EEG for MCI screening: a multimodal LASSO modeling approach.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate diagnosis and assessment of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are essential. The efficacy of saccades in the detection of MCI lacks validation through large-scale clinical trials.
methodsAll eligible participants underwent saccadic assessment in four tasks and a cognitive assessment. MCI diagnoses were made on the basis of clinical indicators and MRI by experienced physicians. The physicians were blinded to the saccade experiments, and the operators of the saccade experiments were blind to the diagnosis of physicians. The classification models based on machine learning were constructed for assessing the diagnostic accuracy of MCI based on saccadic parameters.
resultsOf the 559 residents who consented to participate, 383 (153 with MCI and 230 controls) were completely assessed. The classification model trained by saccadic parameters achieved high accuracy in dissociating MCI and control with an area under the curve (AUROC) of 0.945 (95% CI, 0.924-0.964), sensitivity of 0.824 (95% CI, 0.769-0.886) and specificity of 0.904 (95% CI, 0.867-0.935). The parameters of the memory-guided and antisaccade tasks demonstrated better diagnostic efficacy. The saccade model also exhibited a good diagnostic value in patients with borderline cognition, being defined by the score of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). When the borderline cognition was defined as 23-27 of the MoCA score, the diagnosing accuracy of mild cognitive impairment based on saccadic parameters resulted in AUROC of 0.911 (95% CI, 0.836-0.972), sensitivity of 0.929 (95% CI, 0.762-1.000) and specificity of 0.796 (95% CI, 0.718-0.863).
conclusionsSaccades can distinguish MCI from controls with great accuracy, offering a sensitive and objective diagnostic aid of MCI, especially in participants with borderline cognition.
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.