Automated eye-tracking technology could enhance diagnosis for many neurological diseases, including stroke. Current literature focuses on gaze estimation through a form of calibration. However, patients with neuro-ocular abnormalities may have difficulty completing a calibration procedure due to inattention or other neurological deficits.
Objective: We investigated 1) the need for calibration to measure eye movement symmetry in healthy controls and 2) the potential of eye movement symmetry to distinguish between healthy controls and patients.
Methods: We analyzed fixations, smooth pursuits, saccades, and conjugacy measured by a Spearman correlation coefficient and utilized a linear mixed-effects model to estimate the effect of calibration.
Results: Healthy participants (n = 18) did not differ in correlations between calibrated and non-calibrated conditions for all tests. The calibration condition did not improve the linear mixed effects model (log-likelihood ratio test p = 0.426) in predicting correlation coefficients. Interestingly, the patient group (n = 17) differed in correlations for the DOT (0.844 [95% CI 0.602, 0.920] vs. 0.98 [95% CI 0.976, 0.985]), H (0.903 [95% CI 0.746, 0.958] vs. 0.979 [95% CI 0.971, 0.986]), and OKN (0.898 [95% CI 0.785, 0.958] vs. 0.993 [95% CI 0.987, 0.996]) tests compared to healthy controls along the x-axis. These differences were not observed along the y-axis.
Significance: This study suggests that automated eye tracking can be deployed without calibration to measure eye movement symmetry. It may be a good discriminator between normal and abnormal eye movement symmetry. Validation of these findings in larger populations is required.