ArticleFrontiers in neurology2020
Somatosensory Influence on Platform-Induced Translational Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex in Vertical Direction in Humans.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2020. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic Visual Acuity Results in Otolith Electrical Stimulation in Bilateral Vestibular Dysfunction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) consists of two components, the rotational VOR (rVOR) elicited by semicircular canal signals and the translational VOR (tVOR) elicited by otolith signals. Given the relevant role of the vertical tVOR in human walking, this study aimed at measuring the time delay of eye movements in relation to whole-body vertical translations in natural standing position. Twenty (13 females and 7 males) healthy, young subjects (mean 25 years) stood upright on a motor-driven platform and were exposed to sinusoidal movements while fixating a LED, positioned at a distance of 50 cm in front of the eyes. The platform motion induced a vertical translation of 2.6 cm that provoked counteracting eye movements similar to self-paced walking. The time differences between platform and eye movements indicated that the subject's timing of the extraocular motor reaction depended on stimulus frequency and number of repetitions. At low stimulus frequencies (<0.8 Hz) and small numbers of repetitions (<3), eye movements were phase advanced or in synchrony with platform movements. At higher stimulus frequencies or continuous stimulation, eye movements were phase lagged by ~40 ms. Interestingly, the timing of eye movements depended on the initial platform inclination. Starting with both feet in dorsiflexion, eye movements preceded platform movements by 137 ms, whereas starting with both feet in plantar flexion eye movement precession was only 19 ms. This suggests a remarkable influence of foot proprioceptive signals on the timing of eye movements, indicating that the dynamics of the vertical tVOR is controlled by somatosensory signals.
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.