Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30838497›Full record

ReviewClinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society2019

Autonomic uprising: the tilt table test in autonomic medicine.

William P Cheshire, David S Goldstein

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Setting up an autonomic unit within the neurological department: a position statement of the European Federation of Autonomic Societies.Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

William P CheshireDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA. cheshire@mayo.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-6364-5362
David S GoldsteinClinical Neurocardiology Section, Clinical Neurosciences Program, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Neurological, Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
Jacksonville College · USNational Institutes of Health · US

Funding

Biomarkers of Parkinson Disease and Related DisordersZIANS003034 · NINDS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI GOLDSTEIN, DAVID · 2009 to 2025
$22.8M
Biomarkers of Parkinson Disease and Related DisordersZ01NS003034 · NINDS · NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI GOLDSTEIN, DAVID · 2007 to 2008
$3.9M
Mechanisms of Parkinson Disease and Related DisordersZ01NS003033 · NINDS · NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI GOLDSTEIN, DAVID · 2007 to 2008
$966k
Neurocardiology: Catecholamine Systems In Stress and DisZ01NS002979 · NINDS · NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI GOLDSTEIN, DAVID S · 1999 to 2006
–
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 NS002979Intramural NIH HHS Z01 NS003033Intramural NIH HHS Z01 NS003034Intramural NIH HHS Z99 NS999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This perspective piece on head-up tilt table testing is part of a series on autonomic function testing. The tilt table can be a useful diagnostic test, but methodologies vary, and the results are sometimes misinterpreted. The intent here is not to review comprehensively the utility of various tilt table testing protocols but to convey a number of general points that may give perspective and have practical clinical value, based on an understanding of autonomic physiology and our long clinical and research experience in the evaluation of autonomic disorders. The goals of tilt table testing are to assess orthostatic hypotension (OH), chronic orthostatic intolerance (COI), and unexplained syncope. The testing is useful for distinguishing neurogenic from non-neurogenic OH, identifying failure of the sympathetic noradrenergic system in autonomic neuropathies and ganglionopathies, and assessing baroreflex-sympathoneural function in α-synucleinopathies. For COI, the testing can provide objective data related to the patient's symptoms, diagnose postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS), and distinguish POTS from other causes of tachycardia. Provocative tilt table testing can help understand bases for recurrent transient loss of consciousness in patients with syncope, distinguish neurally mediated syncope from psychogenic pseudosyncope, and separate syncope-related convulsion from epileptic seizures. For each of these purposes, the goals, formats, endpoints, and clinical utility are different. As for any autonomic test, tilt table findings must be interpreted in the context of the patient's clinical presentation.

Indexed as

Autonomic Nervous System DiseasesHumansTilt-Table TestAutonomic nervous system diseasesOrthostatic hypotensionOrthostatic intolerancePostural orthostatic tachycardia syndromeSyncopeTilt table testingVasovagal syncope

Identifiers

PMID30838497
PMCPMC8897774
OpenAlexW2920829658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.