MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7123241737

Comparative study between ViewMind Atlas™, a novel digital measure of cognition, and traditional neuropsychological tests

2025· article· W7123241737 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
María Bárbara Eizaguirre, Mario Parra, Natalia Ciufia, Aldana Marinangeli, Lucía Bacigalupe, Mariana Lucia Zarza, Gloria Lucia Mastroberti, Maria Fernanda Gallo, Lucia Ibarra, Lucas Nicolás Lapalma, Danilo Verge, Matias Shulz, Valentin Barco, Gerardo Braña Fernández

Bibliographic record

VenueStrathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemory spanNeuropsychologyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCognitionVerbal fluency testNeuropsychological assessmentNeuropsychological testTest (biology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cognitive impairment (CI) presents significant challenges in neurodegenerative conditions and aging populations. Traditional cognitive assessment tools often face limitations such as high costs, accessibility barriers, and lengthy administration times. ViewMind Atlas™, a digital biomarker combining eye-tracking technology and artificial intelligence, provides a novel, efficient approach to cognitive evaluation. This study aimed to evaluate the capacity of ViewMind Atlas™ to detect CI, correlate its results with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and other neuropsychological tests, and assess its clinical validity. Method: This cross-sectional, single-centre study included 154 participants aged 45–95 years with and without cognitive complaints. Cognitive assessments were performed using ViewMind Atlas™, which incorporates a head-mounted display (HMD) with integrated eye-tracking sensors. The system measured saccade amplitude, fixation duration, refixation rates, and response times during five validated visual tasks (Moving Dot, Go/No-Go, New Colors, Color Combinations, and n-back). Participants also completed the MoCA and a neuropsychological battery, including the Word Accentuation Test-Buenos Aires (WAT-BA), BEM-144 Logical Memory and Serial Learning, Rey Complex Figure Test, Digit Span and Matrix Reasoning (WAIS-III), Trail Making Tests A and B, Boston Naming Test, Phonological and Semantic Verbal Fluency Tests, and Clock Drawing Test. Statistical analyses included sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, as well as correlations between ViewMind metrics and cognitive test scores. Result: ViewMind Atlas™ demonstrated a sensitivity of 78%, specificity of 70%, and balanced accuracy of 74% for CI detection. Significant correlations were observed between ViewMind metrics and MoCA scores and other neuropsychological test results (p <0.05), validating its ability to identify CI. Conclusion: ViewMind Atlas™, leveraging HMD-based eye-tracking technology, is a valid, efficient tool for detecting cognitive impairment. Its strong alignment with traditional cognitive assessments supports its potential for clinical and research applications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde)Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207