Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,772

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Use of NeuroEyeCoach™ to Improve Eye Movement Efficacy in Patients with Homonymous Visual Field Loss

Open access
Sahraie, Arash, Smania, Nicola, Zihl, Josef·2016·BioMed Research International
DOI 10.1155/2016/5186461
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Visual field deficits are common in patients with damaged retinogeniculostriate pathways. The patient’s eye movements are often affected leading to inefficient visual search. Systematic eye movement training also called compensatory therapy is needed to allow patients to develop effective coping strategies. There is a lack of evidence-based, clinical gold-standard registered medical device accessible to patients at home or in clinical settings and NeuroEyeCoach (NEC) is developed to address this need. In three experiments, we report on performance of patients on NEC compared to the data obtained previously on the earlier versions of the search task (n=32); we assessed whether the self-administered computerised tasks can be used to monitor the progress (n=24) and compared the findings in a subgroup of patients to a healthy control group. Performance on cancellation tasks, simple visual search, and self-reported responses on activities of daily living was compared, before and after training. Patients performed similarly well on NEC as on previous versions of the therapy; the inbuilt functionality for pre- and postevaluation functions was sensitive to allowing assessment of improvements; and improvements in patients were significantly greater than those in a group of healthy adults. In conclusion, NeuroEyeCoach can be used as an effective rehabilitation tool to develop compensatory strategies in patients with visual field deficits after brain injury.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1155/2016/5186461

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 17 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. 10.1016/j.optm.2007.10.012 · doi:10.1016/j.optm.2007.10.012
  2. 10.1007/s00415-010-5617-1 · doi:10.1007/s00415-010-5617-1
  3. 1988, Klinische Monatsblätter für Augenheilkunde, 192, 555, 10.1055/s-2008-1050177 · doi:10.1055/s-2008-1050177
  4. 2011, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
  5. 10.1016/S0304-3940(01)01907-3 · doi:10.1016/s0304-3940(01)01907-3
  6. 10.1136/jnnp.2003.025957 · doi:10.1136/jnnp.2003.025957
  7. 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.03.025 · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2012.03.025
  8. 10.1002/acn3.154 · doi:10.1002/acn3.154
  9. 2014, Rehabilitation of visual field defect

Cited by

See all 1,772

Metadata

Authors
Sahraie, A., Smania, N., & Zihl, J.
Venue
BioMed Research International
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016
Volume
2016
Pages
1-9
ISSN
  • 1110-7243 (ISSN-L)
  • 2314-6133
  • 2314-6141
DOI
10.1155/2016/5186461
OpenAlex
W2519744449
Cited by
1,772
References
17
FWCI
170.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (unspecified)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Use of NeuroEyeCoach™ to Improve Eye Movement Efficacy in Patients with Homonymous Visual Field Loss. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1155/2016/5186461
The paper
Sahraie, A., Smania, N., & Zihl, J. (2016). Use of NeuroEyeCoach™ to Improve Eye Movement Efficacy in Patients with Homonymous Visual Field Loss. BioMed Research International. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5186461

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.