Repeatability and Reproducibility of a Saccadic Eye Movement Time Test
Background/Objectives: Reliable and objective assessment of saccadic duration is crucial in sports vision, yet standardized clinical tools remain scarce; therefore, this study evaluated the intraobserver and interobserver repeatability of saccadic time measurements using COI-SV® software, and analyz...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Sevilla (US) |
| Repositorio: | idUS. Depósito de Investigación de la Universidad de Sevilla |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:idus.us.es:11441/181249 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/11441/181249 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14207170 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Saccadic eye movements Sports visión Intra- and interexaminer repeatability Visual performance Optometry |
| Sumario: | Background/Objectives: Reliable and objective assessment of saccadic duration is crucial in sports vision, yet standardized clinical tools remain scarce; therefore, this study evaluated the intraobserver and interobserver repeatability of saccadic time measurements using COI-SV® software, and analyzed the influence of age and sex. Methods: Saccadic duration was assessed in 78 participants using a 20/40 Snellen letter stimulus appearing in four as recorded. General mean values (total, vertical, horizontal, short, long, and ratios) were calculated. Repeatability was evaluated through a protocol of four test repetitions (two intrasession and two intersession with different examiners). ANCOVA and Pearson correlation assessed sex and age effects. Repeatability indices and Bland–Altman plots were used to determine agreement. Results: Regarding sex, there were no significant differences between men and women. Saccadic duration showed a direct relationship with age (p < 0.05), indicating that older participants had worse saccadic time values (longer times). Overall, intraexaminer repeatability was poor, whereas interexaminer reproducibility was between fair and good. Bland–Altman analysis showed limits of agreement ranging from −159.0 to 220.3 milliseconds (ms) for specific time values and from −87.0 to 122.52 ms for general values, which may be useful in clinical practice. Conclusions: The study shows that the COI-SV® software provides moderate to good interexaminer reliability and poor to acceptable intraexaminer repeatability of saccadic duration measurements, indicating that further refinement and validation are needed before considering clinical implementation |
|---|