ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022
Posturographic Analysis in Patients Affected by Central and Peripheral Visual Impairment.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Balance Performance in People With Peripheral Visual Field Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although vision loss is known to affect equilibrium maintenance, postural control in patients affected by low vision has been poorly investigated. We evaluated postural stability and the ability to use visual, proprioceptive and vestibular information in different low vision patterns. Ten adults with normal vision (NC), fourteen adults affected by central visual impairment (CLV) and eight adults affected by peripheral visual impairment (PLV) were enrolled in our study. Patients underwent visual, vestibular and postural evaluation (bedside examination, Computed Dynamic Posturograophy). Motor Control Tests were performed to analyze automatic postural adaptive responses elicited by unexpected postural disturbances. Clinical evaluations did not show abnormality in all patients. In the Sensory Organization Test, CLV and PLV patients performed more poorly in conditions 3-6 and 3-4, as compared to NC subjects. The condition 5 score was significantly lower in the CLV group with respect to the PLV patients. Composite equilibrium scores demonstrated significant differences between low-vision subjects vs. NC subjects. No differences were found for somatosensorial contribution. Visual afferences showed lower values in all visually impaired subjects, while vestibular contribution was lower in the CLV patients as compared to the NC and PLV patients. MCT latencies were significantly worse in the CLV subjects. In the low-vision patients, postural control was modified with a specific pattern of strategy adaptation. Different modulations of postural control and different adaptive responses seemed to characterize CLV patients as compared to PLV subjects.
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.