ArticleHNO2018
[Pilot study: Determination of the subjective trunk vertical in upright head position].
Article in HNO, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConsensus has been established that the subjective vertical (SV) is a result of multimodal sensory integration. In order to be able to calculate the vestibulocervical sensory competence for the SV, the isolated subjective trunk vertical axis (STV) was measured under conditions of vertical head fixation. MATERIALS AND
methodsYoung, healthy volunteers (n = 49) were compared to older, healthy volunteers (n = 50) on a three-dimensionally deflectable (tilt, torsion, pitch) trunk excursion chair in which the volunteer's head remains in an upright position. Another young, healthy group was divided into a placebo (n = 27) and a monophasic cervical transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (C-TENS; n = 22) group to examine verticality perception.
resultsIn the STV after trunk pitch, age was a significant variable (p = 0.021). The older, healthy group of subjects missed the physical vertical by an average of 1.8° more than the younger group. Only the placebo group showed an average improvement in STV of 4.3° after torsion.
conclusionApart from the macular organs the vestibulocervical sensory afference is involved in finding the trunk vertical. A difference in age to the disadvantage of the older healthy subjects was observed, as well as a lack of learning success after applied C‑TENS. The presented pilot study was able to confirm that a correct vertical trunk sensation is caused by vestibulocervical sensory afference in upright head position.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30022256What 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.