ArticleExperimental brain research2013
Contribution of visual velocity and displacement cues to human balancing of support surface tilt.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Head position control strategies in progressive Supranuclear Palsy versus Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease during dynamic-on-static platform tilt.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Reliance on Visual Input for Balance Skill Transfer in Older Adults: EEG Connectome Analysis Using Minimal Spanning Tree.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2021Article
- Visual Modulation of Human Responses to Support Surface Translation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Visual contribution to human standing balance during support surface tilts.Human movement science · 2015Article
- Cineradiographic analysis of mouse postural response to alteration of gravity and jerk (gravity deceleration rate).Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vision helps humans in controlling bipedal stance, interacting mainly with vestibular and proprioceptive cues. This study investigates how postural compensation of support surface tilt is compromised by selectively reducing visual velocity cues by stroboscopic illumination of a stationary visual scene. Healthy adult subjects were presented with pseudorandom tilt sequences in the sagittal plane (tilt frequency range 0.017-2.2 Hz; velocity amplitude spectrum constant up to a frequency of 0.6 Hz, angular displacement amplitude spectrum increasing with decreasing frequencies). Center of mass (COM) sway responses were recorded for stroboscopic illuminations at 48, 32, 16, 8, and 4 Hz, as well as under continuous illumination and with eyes closed. With strobe duration (5 ms) and mean luminance (1 lx) kept constant, visual acuity and perceived brightness remained constant and the visual scene was perceived as stationary. Yet, tilt-evoked COM excursions increased with decreasing strobe frequency in a graded way, with largest effects occurring at tilt frequencies where large tilt velocities coincided with small displacements. In addition, COM excursions were reduced at the lowest strobe frequency compared to eyes closed, with the largest effect occurring at tilt frequencies where tilt displacements were large. We conclude that two mechanisms exist, a velocity mechanism that deals with tilt compensation and is foremost affected by the stroboscopic illumination and a displacement mechanism. This compares favorably to previous findings that, transferred to a stance control model, suggest a velocity mechanism for tilt compensation and a position mechanism for gravity compensation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.