ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Identification of Neural Mechanisms in First Single-Sweep Analysis in oVEMPs and Novel Normative Data.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBone-conducted (BC) VEMPs provide important tools for measuring otolith function. However, two major drawbacks of this method are encountered in clinical practice-small n10 amplitude and averaging technique. In this study, we present the results of a new VEMP setup measuring technique combined with a novel single-sweep analysis.
methodsThe study included BC oVEMP data from 92 participants for the evaluation of normative data using a novel analysis technique. For evaluating test-retest reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used.
resultsWe found significant n10 amplitude differences in single-sweep analyses after the first and second measurements. Thereby, mathematical analyses of the head movement did not show any differences in the first or second measurements. The normative n10 amplitude was 20.66 µV with an asymmetric ratio (AR) of 7%. The new value of late shift difference (LSD) was 0.01 ms. The test retest-reliability showed good to excellent ICC results in 9 out of 10 measurements.
conclusionsOur results support a phenomenon in single-sweep analysis of the first stimuli independent of head movement and signal morphology. Furthermore, the values obtained with the new measurement method appear to be more sensitive and may allow an extended diagnostic range due to the new parameter LSD.
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.