ArticleJournal of neuroscience methods2019
Calibrating balance perturbation using electrical stimulation of the vestibular system.
Article in Journal of neuroscience methods, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of individually calibrated white and pink noise vestibular stimulation on standing balance of young healthy adults.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Effects of perceptible and imperceptible galvanic vestibular stimulation on the postural control of patients with bilateral vestibulopathy.Journal of neurology · 2020Article
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
Abstract
backgroundSupra-threshold galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) can be used to challenge the balance control system by disrupting vestibular inputs. The goal of this study was to propose an objective method to assess variability across subjects in the minimum safe GVS level that causes maximum balance degradation. New method: Thirteen healthy young subjects stood on a compliant foam surface with their eyes closed and tried to maintain a stable upright stance. Variables related to the stability of the trunk and whole body were quantified to characterize the relationship between postural responses and GVS at amplitudes from 0 to 4.5 mA in 0.5 mA increments. The relationship between decrements in postural responses and GVS was linear up to a minimum GVS level (called KNEE). An increase in the stimulation level above that did not lead to any further degradation of balance performance. The KNEE was determined by iteratively performing linear fits to the performance measure at different stimulation levels.
resultsThere were individual differences in KNEE; it was in the range of 1-2.5 mA across subjects. GVS caused an average performance decrement of 27-99% across six variables at the KNEE level compared to a no-stimulus condition. Comparison to existing methods: We propose a method to consistently attain the maximum level of impairment across subjects using the minimum current intensity, to minimize all types of adverse effects usually observed at high intensities.
conclusionsIndividual differences in the disruption of posture control in response to GVS have important implications for testing and training paradigms.
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.