Back

Automated Eye-Tracking for Parkinson's Disease Diagnosis: A Proof-of-Concept Cascade Classifier Study Establishing Clinical Validity

Shill, H. A.; Menke, J. M.; Aslam, S.; Rieiro, H.; Waldorf, R.

2026-06-24 neurology
10.64898/2026.06.22.26355826 medRxiv
Show abstract

Abstract Background. Parkinson's disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder of increasing prevalence, with diagnostic accuracy of approximately 26% in early symptomatic patients. There is a need for accurate, non-invasive biomarkers to aid in disease diagnosis. Methods. This proof-of-concept study enrolled 90 participants (PD n = 30, other movement disorders [OM] n = 30, healthy controls [HC] n = 30) at a single institution. Participants completed two 10-minute eye-tracking sessions using the SaccadeDX 250 Hz binocular system. A two-level cascade classifier was fitted using elastic-net feature selection followed by logistic regression on the selected features, validated by 10-fold cross-validation. The cascade distinguished HC from movement disorders (Level 1) and PD from OM (Level 2), with the objective of establishing clinical validity that an eye-tracking signal correlates reliably with PD diagnosis. Results. Level 1 achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.818 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.91), with a sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 63%. Level 2 achieved an AUC of 0.670 (95% CI: 0.52, 0.80), with a sensitivity of 68% and specificity of 63%. End-to-end PD detection achieved an AUC of 0.866 and an accuracy of 83.5%, meeting the prospectively specified accuracy threshold and the proof-of-concept AUC benchmark. Five adverse events were recorded (three cases of dizziness, one of nausea, and one of dry eyes); one participant withdrew from the study. Conclusions. Clinical validity is established: a reproducible eye-tracking signal for PD is detectable using a two-level cascade classifier. A multi-center confirmatory study is warranted before assessment of clinical utility.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.