ArticlePloS one2019
Examining practice effects in repeated measurements of vibration perception thresholds on finger pulps of healthy individuals - Is it possible to improve your results over a clinically relevant test interval?
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- How to determine hands' vibration perception thresholds - a systematic review.Behavior research methods · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Normative values of the vibration perception thresholds at finger pulps and metatarsal heads in healthy adults.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo investigate practice effects in a test-retest situation, where vibration perception thresholds (VPT) were measured in healthy subjects using a multi-frequency test method.
methodsIn eight consecutive tests, VPTs were tested in the pulps of the index and little fingers at seven frequencies (8, 16, 32, 64, 125, 250 and 500 Hz). Subjects were twenty healthy adults aged 26 to 65 years (mean 46.0 ± 11.1 years; 10 male and 10 female). The subjects were examined at six tests with intervals of one month (mean 33 ± 6; time 0 to month 5) and at two additional tests with prolonged intervals (month 12 and 18). Linear mixed model analysis was performed to investigate differences over the subsequent test occasions. To examine where potential practice effects occurred, a pairwise comparison with Bonferroni correction was made.
resultsSmall decreases in VPTs were found in 8 out of the 14 frequencies (index finger: 8, 16, 32, 250 and 500 Hz; little finger: 16, 250 and 500 Hz) within the test period from time 0 to month 5. In tests at 12 and 18 months, VPTs were increased compared to month 5, but lowered in comparison with time 0. Hence, minor significant decreases were found in three frequencies for the index finger (125, 250 and 500 Hz) and one frequency for the little finger (250 Hz) when examining VPTs with prolonged time intervals.
conclusionsWhen evaluating vibration perception thresholds in a clinically relevant time period of once or twice a year, no consideration of practice effects is necessary when interpreting the results.
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.