ArticleBiomedicine hub
Differences in Responses on the Modified Clinical Test of Sensory Interaction and Balance on Medium Firm and Medium Density Foam in Healthy Controls and Patients with Vestibular Disorders.
Article in Biomedicine hub. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Direct Peroneal and Tibial Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for Improving Postural Control in European Women with Diabetic Polyneuropathy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Neurological update: neuro-otology 2023.Journal of neurology · 2023Article
- Screening People on Standing Balance with Romberg Testing and Walking Balance with Tandem Walking.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2023Article
- Article
- Critical evaluation of the benefits and limitations of foam posturography in vestibular disorders: a narrative review.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine whether foam density affects modified Romberg balance test performance. MATERIALS AND
methodsControls and patients with vestibular disorders performed Romberg tests on medium and medium firm foam, with their eyes closed and the head still and moving in yaw and pitch. The trial duration and number of head movements were measured.
resultsSubjects aged >60 years performed longer and with more head movements on medium firm foam than on medium foam. Older controls did not differ between medium firm and medium foam. Older patients had higher scores on head-still and head-yaw trials on medium firm foam versus medium foam but pitch trials did not differ. Females, controls, and patients had longer trial durations and more head movements on medium firm foam than on medium density foam; male controls did not differ by foam density. Male patients differed in yaw trials.
conclusionFoam density affects scores. Clinical decision-making may be adversely affected if the clinician uses foam of a density that is not the same as that of the foam that was used in the studies that developed descriptive statistics, sensitivity, and specificity.
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.