ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2016
Do Visual and Vestibular Inputs Compensate for Somatosensory Loss in the Perception of Spatial Orientation? Insights from a Deafferented Patient.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- A pilot study: effect of somatosensory loss on motor corrections in response to unknown loads in a reaching task by chronic stroke survivors.Biomedical engineering letters · 2024Article
- Both whole-body rotation and visual flow induce cardiovascular autonomic response in human, but visual response is overridden by vestibular stimulation.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Spatial perspective-taking: insights from sensory impairments.Experimental brain research · 2022Review
- Where is my hand in space? The internal model of gravity influences proprioception.Biology letters · 2021Article
- Body orientation contributes to modelling the effects of gravity for target interception in humans.The Journal of physiology · 2019Article
- The Effect of Cognitive Resource Competition Due to Dual-Tasking on the Irregularity and Control of Postural Movement Components.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Somatosensory Loss Influences the Adoption of Self-Centered Versus Decentered Perspectives.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
- A New and Faster Test to Assess Vestibular Perception.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
- Article
- Does Proprioception Influence Human Spatial Cognition? A Study on Individuals With Massive Deafferentation.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- Tissue engineering the mechanosensory circuit of the stretch reflex arc with human stem cells: Sensory neuron innervation of intrafusal muscle fibers.Biomaterials · 2017Article
- Head Stability and Head-Trunk Coordination in Horseback Riders: The Contribution of Visual Information According to Expertise.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2017Article
- Predictive Simulation of Reaching Moving Targets Using Nonlinear Model Predictive Control.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed at investigating the consequences of a massive loss of somatosensory inputs on the perception of spatial orientation. The occurrence of possible compensatory processes for external (i.e., object) orientation perception and self-orientation perception was examined by manipulating visual and/or vestibular cues. To that aim, we compared perceptual responses of a deafferented patient (GL) with respect to age-matched Controls in two tasks involving gravity-related judgments. In the first task, subjects had to align a visual rod with the gravitational vertical (i.e., Subjective Visual Vertical: SVV) when facing a tilted visual frame in a classic Rod-and-Frame Test. In the second task, subjects had to report whether they felt tilted when facing different visuo-postural conditions which consisted in very slow pitch tilts of the body and/or visual surroundings away from vertical. Results showed that, much more than Controls, the deafferented patient was fully dependent on spatial cues issued from the visual frame when judging the SVV. On the other hand, the deafferented patient did not rely at all on visual cues for self-tilt detection. Moreover, the patient never reported any sensation of tilt up to 18° contrary to Controls, hence showing that she did not rely on vestibular (i.e., otoliths) signals for the detection of very slow body tilts either. Overall, this study demonstrates that a massive somatosensory deficit substantially impairs the perception of spatial orientation, and that the use of the remaining sensory inputs available to a deafferented patient differs regarding whether the judgment concerns external vs. self-orientation.
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.