ArticleBMC psychiatry2026
Real-world application of an eye-tracking device for autism screening and diagnosis: a short report from public demonstrations in Qatar, Dubai and the U.S.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Participant-Independent Classification of Autism-Related Visual Attention Patterns from Eye-Tracking Scanpath Images Using a Global-Local Fusion Network.Journal of eye movement research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSocial attention abnormalities are a hallmark of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), often characterized by atypical gaze patterns.
aimThis report showed the real-world feasibility of an eye-tracking–based screening paradigm for ASD across diverse general population samples.
methodsA total of 536 adults participated in public demonstrations. An Autism Index (AI), derived from a previously validated eye-tracking paradigm, was calculated from gaze patterns toward social and nonsocial stimuli. Participants were stratified into typically developing (TD), neurodivergent, and ASD groups based on validated AI cut-offs.
resultsMedian AI scores differed significantly across groups − 0.31 (TD), 0.53 (neurodivergent), and 0.69 (ASD)- with post-hoc tests confirming higher scores in the ASD and neurodivergent groups versus TD. Gender-based analyses showed that males had significantly higher AI scores than females (p = 0.028). Among those classified as ASD, 95% reported a formal diagnosis, supporting the validity of the tool. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.997. At the optimal cut-off score of 0.555, the tool achieved 100% sensitivity and 99.4% specificity.
conclusionThis report highlights the feasibility and accuracy of the eye-tracking paradigm as a scalable and objective screening tool for ASD in general adult populations, supporting its potential for broader clinical implementation. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.