SynthesisFrontiers in neuroscience2021
Pupil Reactions to Tactile Stimulation: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blue enriched light modulates pupil dilation induced by transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Fidgeting Increases Pupil Diameter During Auditory Processing in Young Healthy Adults.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Choice enhances touch pleasantness.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- Assessment and management of pain/nociception in patients with disorders of consciousness or locked-in syndrome: A narrative review.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2023Review
- Salient omissions-pupil dilation in response to unexpected omissions of sound and touch.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Atypical Response to Affective Touch in Children with Autism: Multi-Parametric Exploration of the Autonomic System.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pupil dynamics can represent an indirect measure of perception; thus, it has been broadly explored in the auditory and visual fields. Although it is crucial for experiencing the outside world, tactile perception is not well-explored. Considering that, we sought to answer the following question via a systematic review: does normal tactile perception processing modulate pupil dilation in mammals (human or not)? The review process was conducted according to PRISMA Statement. We searched on Periódicos CAPES (Brazil) for the following terms: [(touch) OR (cutaneous stimulation) OR (tactile perception) OR (somatosensory) AND (pupil OR pupillary) NOT blind NOT reflex NOT pain NOT fear NOT noxious NOT autism NOT nerve NOT (pupillary block) NOT glaucoma NOT cataract NOT aneurysm NOT syndrome NOT treatment NOT special education]. From the 6,488 papers found, 4,568 were duplicates, and nine fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All papers found a positive relationship between pupil diameter and tactile perception. We found that the pupil is a reliable indirect measure of brain states and can evaluate norepinephrine (NE)/locus coeruleus (LC) action, stimulus inhibition, arousal, cognitive processes, and affection independently of the stimuli category (visual, auditory, or tactile). We also found that the perceptual tactile processing occurs in similar ways as the other perceptual modalities. We verified that more studies should be done, mostly avoiding low sampling rate recording systems, confounders as cue signs, not automated stimulation, and concurrent stimulus and using more reliable equipment.
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.