ArticleScientific reports2020
Reproducibility of flutter-range vibrotactile detection and discrimination thresholds.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- In Vivo Glx Measurements From GABA-Edited HERMES at 3 T Are Not Consistent With Those From Short-TE PRESS Across Scanners, Brain Regions, Diagnostic and Age Groups.NMR in biomedicine · 2026Article
- Perceiving temporal structure within and between the senses: A multisensory/crossmodal perspective.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Review
- Characterising the association between posterior parietal metabolite levels and cortical macrostructure in a cohort spanning childhood to adulthood.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Probing the Neurophysiology of Temporal Sensitivity in the Somatosensory System Using the Mismatch Negativity (MMN) Sensory Memory Paradigm.Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Could Sensory Differences Be a Sex-Indifferent Biomarker of Autism? Early Investigation Comparing Tactile Sensitivity Between Autistic Males and Females.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2024Article
- Atypical Tactile Perception in Early Childhood Autism.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2023Article
- Nonlinear age effects in tactile processing from early childhood to adulthood.Brain and behavior · 2022Article
- Module for Monitoring the Probe-Skin Contact Force in the Study of Vibration Perception on the Wrist.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Disorder-specific alterations of tactile sensitivity in neurodevelopmental disorders.Communications biology · 2021Article
- Chronic Neurophysiological Effects of Repeated Head Trauma in Retired Australian Male Sport Athletes.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Integrating Tactile Feedback Technologies Into Home-Based Telerehabilitation: Opportunities and Challenges in Light of COVID-19 Pandemic.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2021Review
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
Abstract
Somatosensory processing can be probed empirically through vibrotactile psychophysical experiments. Psychophysical approaches are valuable for investigating both normal and abnormal tactile function in healthy and clinical populations. To date, the test-retest reliability of vibrotactile detection and discrimination thresholds has yet to be established. This study sought to assess the reproducibility of vibrotactile detection and discrimination thresholds in human adults using an established vibrotactile psychophysical battery. Fifteen healthy adults underwent three repeat sessions of an eleven-task battery that measured a range of vibrotactile measures, including reaction time, detection threshold, amplitude and frequency discrimination, and temporal order judgement. Coefficients of variation and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for the measures in each task. Linear mixed-effects models were used to test for length and training effects and differences between tasks within the same domain. Reaction times were shown to be the most reproducible (ICC: ~0.9) followed by detection thresholds (ICC: ~0.7). Frequency discrimination thresholds were the least reproducible (ICC: ~0.3). As reported in prior studies, significant differences in measures between related tasks were also found, demonstrating the reproducibility of task-related effects. These findings show that vibrotactile detection and discrimination thresholds are reliable, further supporting the use of psychophysical experiments to probe tactile function.
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.