ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2020
Visual Verticality Perception in Spinal Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Misperception of body verticality in neurological disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Brain and behavior · 2024Pooled it
- Is Visual Vertical Perception Altered in Children and Adolescents with Spinal Misalignment? A Cross-Sectional Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Vestibular Morphological Alterations in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- New Mobile Device to Measure Verticality Perception: Results in Young Subjects with Headaches.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Misperception of Visual Verticality in Patients with Primary Headache Disorders: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Brain sciences · 2020Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Patients diagnosed with traumatic or non-traumatic spinal pain and idiopathic scoliosis frequently suffer from imbalance. The evaluation of the perception of verticality by means of visual tests emerges as a quick and easy tool for clinical management of the balance disorders. Several studies have assessed the visual perception of verticality in spinal diseases obtaining controversial results. The aim of our study is to analyze the perception of visual verticality in subjects with several spinal diseases in comparison with healthy subjects. A meta-analysis was carried out. PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, WoS, CINAHL, and SciELO databases were searched until January 2020. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated to analyze differences between patients and healthy controls. Fifteen studies with a total of 2052 patients were included. In comparison with healthy subjects, a misperception of verticality was found in patients with spinal pain when the perception of the verticality was assessed with the rod and frame test (SMD = 0.339; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.181, 0.497;
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.