000168638 001__ 168638
000168638 005__ 20260212205631.0
000168638 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.3390/jemr19010004
000168638 0248_ $$2sideral$$a148063
000168638 037__ $$aART-2025-148063
000168638 041__ $$aeng
000168638 100__ $$aLacort-Beltrán, Marta
000168638 245__ $$aThe Impact of Ophthalmic Lens Power and Treatments on Eye Tracking Performance
000168638 260__ $$c2025
000168638 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000168638 5203_ $$aEye tracking (ET) technology is increasingly used in both research and clinical practice, but its accuracy may be compromised by the presence of ophthalmic lenses. This study systematically evaluated the influence of different optical prescriptions and lens treatments on ET performance using DIVE (Device for an Integral Visual Examination). Fourteen healthy participants underwent oculomotor control tests under thirteen optical conditions: six with varying dioptric powers and six with optical filters, compared against a no-lens control. Key parameters analysed included angle error, fixation stability (bivariate contour ellipse area, BCEA), saccadic accuracy, number of data gaps, and proportion of valid frames. High-powered spherical lenses (+6.00 D and −6.00 D) significantly increased gaze angle error, and the negative lens also increased data gaps, while cylindrical lenses had a moderate effect. Among filters, the Natural IR coating caused the greatest deterioration in ET performance, reducing valid samples and increasing the number of gaps with data loss, likely due to interference with the infrared-based detection system. The lens with basic anti-reflective treatment (SV Org 1.5 AR) also showed some deterioration in interaction with the ET. Other filters showed minimal or no significant impact. These findings demonstrate that both high-powered prescriptions and certain lens treatments can compromise ET data quality, highlighting the importance of accounting for optical conditions in experimental design and clinical applications.
000168638 536__ $$9nfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/MICIN/AEI/DIN2021-012296
000168638 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aby$$uhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.es
000168638 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
000168638 700__ $$aAlejandre, Adrián
000168638 700__ $$aGuillén, Sara
000168638 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-5592-8442$$aVilella, Marina$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000168638 700__ $$aPan, Xian
000168638 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0002-1777-0349$$aPueyo, Victoria$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000168638 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0003-3161-3793$$aOrtin, Marta
000168638 700__ $$aEsteban-Ibañez, Eduardo$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000168638 7102_ $$11013$$2646$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Cirugía$$cÁrea Oftalmología
000168638 7102_ $$11011$$2615$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Microb.Ped.Radio.Sal.Pú.$$cÁrea Medic.Prevent.Salud Públ.
000168638 773__ $$g19, 1 (2025), [16 pp.]$$pJ. eye mov. res.$$tJournal of eye movement research$$x1995-8692
000168638 8564_ $$s2047948$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/168638/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yVersión publicada
000168638 8564_ $$s2429178$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/168638/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yVersión publicada
000168638 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:168638$$particulos$$pdriver
000168638 951__ $$a2026-02-12-20:38:30
000168638 980__ $$aARTICLE