Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33136647›Full record

Observational studyEar and hearing

How Good Are We in Evaluating a Bedside Head Impulse Test?

Athanasia Korda, John Patrick Carey, Ewa Zamaro, Marco Domenico Caversaccio, Georgios Mantokoudis

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Does vestibular function correlate with objective MRI findings after vestibular schwannoma surgery?Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Athanasia KordaUniversity Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, lnselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
John Patrick CareyDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Ewa ZamaroUniversity Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, lnselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Marco Domenico CaversaccioUniversity Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, lnselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Georgios MantokoudisUniversity Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, lnselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
University of Bern · CHUniversity Hospital of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesClinicians performing a horizontal head impulse test (HIT) are looking for a corrective saccade. The detection of such saccades is a challenge. The aim of this study is to assess an expert's likelihood of detecting corrective saccades in subjects with vestibular hypofunction.

designIn a prospective cohort observational study at a tertiary referral hospital, we assessed 365 horizontal HITs performed clinically by an expert neurootologist from a convenience sample of seven patients with unilateral or bilateral deficient vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR). All HITs were recorded simultaneously by video-oculography, as a gold standard. We evaluated saccades latency and amplitude, head velocity, and gain.

resultsSaccade amplitude was statistically the most significant parameter for saccade detection (p < 0.001).The probability of saccade detection was eight times higher for HIT toward the pathological side (p = 0.029). In addition, an increase in saccade amplitude resulted in an increased probability of detection (odds ratio [OR] 1.77 [1.31 to 2.40] per degree, p < 0.001). The sensitivity to detect a saccade amplitude of 1 degree was 92.9% and specificity 79%. Saccade latency and VOR gain did not significantly influence the probability of the physician identifying a saccade (OR 1.02 [0.94 to 1.11] per 10-msec latency and OR 0.84 [0.60 to 1.17] per 0.1 VOR gain increase).

conclusionsThe saccade amplitude is the most important factor for accurate saccade detection in clinically performed head impulse tests. Contrary to current knowledge, saccade latency and VOR gain play a minor role in saccade detection.

Indexed as

Head Impulse TestReflex, Vestibulo-OcularHumansProspective StudiesSaccadesTertiary Care Centers

Identifiers

PMID33136647
PMCPMC7722467
OpenAlexW3035490744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.