Eye-hand coordination during a precision grasping and placement task in children with a history of amblyopia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eye-hand coordination is a key aspect of visuomotor control essential for performing most daily activities. Disruption in visuomotor control, characterized by slower arm movements and grasping errors, has been documented in children with amblyopia. This study aimed to characterize the effects of amblyopia on the temporal pattern of eye and hand coordination during the performance of a task that involves reaching, precision grasping, and placement. The study recruited 28 children with a history of amblyopia and 56 typically developing peers (age range 6-14 years). Children performed a bead-threading task while their eyes and hand movements were recorded concurrently. As hypothesized, children with amblyopia demonstrated poorer task performance, with greater deficits for the object manipulation compared to the reaching (transport) components. In comparison to their peers with normal vision, children with amblyopia had shorter reaction time for initiating eye and hand movement, longer object fixation duration to guide grasp execution and object placement, and lower eye-hand latency difference for the second movement indicating that the hand movement preceded eye initiation. These results suggest that children with amblyopia have poorer motor planning ability, which impacts movement execution. Longer fixations during object manipulations indicate that more time is required to transform the noisy visual input into a motor response. Overall, the study adds to the growing body of evidence highlighting deficits in visuomotor control in amblyopia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".