ArticlePloS one2021
Measuring threshold and latency of motion perception on a swinging bed.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02851524 (Proof of Concept Study Concerning Vestibular Stimulation Using a New Method of Dynamic Posturography.), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Proof of Concept Study Concerning Vestibular Stimulation Using a New Method of Dynamic Posturography.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delay and Acceleration Threshold of Movement Perception in Patients Suffering from Vertigo or Dizziness.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Interaction between Feet and Gaze in Postural Control.Brain sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOur objective was to develop and to evaluate a system to measure latency and threshold of pendular motion perception based on a swinging bed. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective study included 30 healthy adults (age: 32 ± 12 years). All subjects were tested twice with a 10 min. interval. A second trial was conducted 2 to 15 days after. A rehabilitation swinging bed was connected to an electronic device emitting a beep at the beginning of each oscillation phase with an adjustable time lag. Subjects were blindfolded and auditory cues other than the beep were minimized. The acceleration threshold was measured by letting the bed oscillate freely until a natural break and asking the patient when he did not perceive any motion. The perception latency was determined by asking the patient to indicate whether the beep and the peak of each oscillation were synchronous. The time lag between sound and peak of the head position was swept from -750 to +750 ms by 50 ms increments.
resultsThe mean acceleration threshold was 9.2±4.60 cm/s2. The range width of the synchronous perception interval was estimated as 535±190 ms. The point of subjective synchronicity defined as the center of this interval was -195±106 ms (n = 30). The test-retest evaluation in the same trial showed an acceptable reproducibility for the acceleration threshold and good to excellent for all parameters related to sound-movement latency.
conclusionSwinging bed combined to sound stimulation can provide reproducible information on movement perception in a simple and non-invasive manner with highly reproducible results.
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.