Evidence

Scientific foundation for objective cognitive measurement.

RetinaTek's evidence base supports the development of objective neurocognitive performance metrics while keeping public claims clearly separated from future clinical diagnostic claims.

74.7%

Evidence-backed

BEAM multimodal classifier

Reported in a chronic mTBI vs control cohort, with Nagelkerke R2 = 38%.

Source: Chronic mTBI vs control cohort source materials

p=.011

Evidence-backed

Longitudinal recovery tracking

VR+ cohort N=103 showed BEAM Saccadic Inhibition Errors changed more steeply in subacute mTBI than controls.

Source: VR+ longitudinal recovery source materials

0/151

Evidence-backed

VR tolerability signal

0/48 in a mobile-VR pilot and 0/103 in repeated VR+ exposures across the available source materials.

Source: Mobile-VR pilot and repeated VR+ exposure source materials

AUC 0.99

Evidence-backed

Best-effort vs fake-bad responding

BEAM saccadic-validity index reported AUC 0.99 with 95% CI 0.96-1.00.

Source: BEAM performance-validity source materials

Evidence domains

Organized for scientific, regulatory, and partner diligence.

  • Diagnostic discrimination
  • Longitudinal recovery tracking
  • Clinical and functional convergence
  • Operational performance under cognitive load
  • Embedded performance validity
  • Tolerability and acceptability

Claims boundary

Metrics on this page are public highlights drawn from RetinaTek source materials and are presented for diligence context. They are not FDA-cleared diagnostic claims and should be interpreted alongside primary source materials and regulatory strategy.