ReviewBiomedicines2022
What Predictability for Animal Models of Peripheral Vestibular Disorders?
Review in Biomedicines, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of inter-individual variability in experimenters' sensitivity and training on behavioral assessment of animal models of vestibular disorders.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Molecular profile of vestibular compensation in the medial vestibular nucleus after unilateral labyrinthectomy.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2024Article
- Histaminergic System and Vestibular Function in Normal and Pathological Conditions.Current neuropharmacology · 2024Review
- Animal Models of Neurological Disorders: Where Are We Now?Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Pimozide Increases a Delayed Rectifier KBiomedicines · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The different clinical entities grouped under the term peripheral vestibulopathies (PVs) or peripheral vestibular disorders (PVDs) are distinguished mainly based on their symptoms/clinical expression. Today, there are very few commonly accepted functional and biological biomarkers that can confirm or refute whether a vestibular disorder belongs to a precise classification. Consequently, there is currently a severe lack of reliable and commonly accepted clinical endpoints, either to precisely follow the course of the vertigo syndrome of vestibular origin or to assess the benefits of therapeutic approaches, whether they are pharmacological or re-educational. Animal models of PV are a good means to identify biomarkers that could subsequently be exploited in human clinical practice. The question of their predictability is therefore crucial. Ten years ago, we had already raised this question. We revisit this concept today in order to take into account the animal models of peripheral vestibular pathology that have emerged over the last decade, and the new technological approaches available for the behavioral assessment of vestibular syndrome in animals and its progression over time. The questions we address in this review are the following: are animal models of PV predictive of the different types and stages of vestibular pathologies, and if so, to what extent? Are the benefits of the pharmacological or reeducational therapeutic approaches achieved on these different models of PV (in particular the effects of attenuation of the acute vertigo, or acceleration of central compensation) predictive of those expected in the vertiginous patient, and if so, to what extent?
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.