Eye gaze performance for children with severe physical impairments using gaze-based assistive technology—A longitudinal study

Figures & data

Table 1. Children’s characteristics.

Characteristics	Children
	(n = 10)
Sex
Boys	8
Girls	2
Age m (SD)	8.6 (4.6)
School
Mainstream school, special class	2
Special school	6
Special preschool	1
Diagnosis
CP dyskinetic	4
CP spastic diplegia	2
CP spastic tetraplegia	3
Cervical spinal cord injury	1
Gross motor function^a (Gross Motor Function Classification System)
Level IV	4
Level V	5
Manual ability^a (Manual Ability Classification System)
Level IV	5
Level V	4
Communication function^a (Communication Function Classification System)
Level IV	7
Level V	2
Cognition
No impairment	3
Unspecified cognitive impairment	5
Unknown (not been possible to assess)	2
Vision
Refractive error	4
Eye glasses (during gaze-based assistive technology interaction)	1
Alternating strabismus	2
Cerebral Visual Impairment	1
Hearing
Hearing impairment (no need for hearing aid)	2
Epilepsy	4

Notes. ^aOnly applicable to children diagnosed with cerebral palsy. CP = Cerebral Palsy.

Figure 1. Time points (T1–T4) for data collection with Compass (in months). MPC = multi-professional communication team.

Figure 2. Time on task (sec) and accuracy (%) for each child at each time point (T1–T4).

Figure 3. Accuracy and time on task (median value) for group A (Emma, Daniel, Max, Adam, David, Marcus, and Anna) gaining functional benefits (accurate and fast), group B (Isaac and Lucas) with not so functional gains (improved accuracy but slow), and Jacob, showing decreased performance over time.