ArticleBrain and behavior2022
Effect of static and dynamic jaw positions on postural stability among people with blindness.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Jaw-Sucking Movements on Postural Muscles Tension in Young Adults.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Effect of static and dynamic jaw positions on postural stability among people with blindness.Brain and behavior · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn comparison with the people with normal sight, the mean center of gravity (COG) velocity is significantly higher among blind people. A strong relationship has been shown between jaw and neck sensorimotor and postural control. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of different static and dynamic jaw positions on postural stability among subjects with blindness.
methodsPostural stability was measured as COG velocity in 39 blind subjects under the following five conditions: resting jaw (natural jaw position with no instructions, control), open jaw (teeth of both jaws slightly apart), clenched jaw (teeth tightly closed across each other), chewing (a standard bolus of gum at the natural palace), and tongue position (positioned behind the upper incisors) while standing on firm and foam surfaces.
resultsThe mean COG velocity while standing on the firm surface during resting, open jaw position, clenched jaw position, chewing, and tongue positions were 0.54, 0.50, 0.44, 0.59, and 0.46 deg/s, respectively. The mean COG velocity while standing on the foam surface during resting, open jaw position, clenched jaw position, chewing, and tongue positions were 1.42, 1.23, 1.10, 1.14, and 1.06 deg/s, respectively. Compared to the firm surface, the COG velocity was significantly higher on the foam surface in all five conditions (p < .001). In the comparison between the conditions, there were no significant differences in either the firm or foam surface in all five conditions (p > .05).
conclusionPeople with blindness behave in the same way as sighted subjects on firm and foam surfaces. However, changes in static and dynamic jaw positions do not affect postural stability among them.
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.