ArticleThe journal of international advanced otology2023
The Conventional Head Impulse Test Versus the Suppression Head Impulse Test: A Clinical Comparative Study.
Article in The journal of international advanced otology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eye Drift Signal Analysis Caused by Goggle Slippage in vHIT Measurements: A Signal Processing Perspective.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The patterns of anti-compensatory saccades of the SHIMP paradigm can differentiate vestibular migraine from healthy individuals.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Article
- A Clinical Infrared Video-Oculoscopy Suppression Head Impulse (IR-cSHIMP) Test.Audiology research · 2024Article
- Suppression head impulse test in children-experiences in a tertiary paediatric vestibular centre.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe suppression head impulse test is a new paradigm of the head impulse test, recently introduced for clinical use. The aim of this study was to assess the importance of the suppression head impulse paradigm in evaluating vestibular function.
methodsThis comparative study was conducted from June 2020 to June 2022. The ears of the participants were divided into 2 groups: (i) ears with vestibular weakness and (ii) healthy controls. All participants underwent video head impulse tests at the time of presentation with both conventional head impulse paradigm and suppression head impulse paradigm, performed by the same examiner. The results of the 2 tests were compared, and the correlation between the corresponding parameters obtained (vestibulo-ocular reflex gain and saccades) was examined.
resultsNinety-five participants were included in the study (190 ears) with a mean age of 42.2 ± 12.6 years. Forty-six ears had vestibular weakness, and 144 were healthy controls. The suppression head impulse paradigm test showed a significantly lower vestibulo-ocular reflex gain than the head impulse paradigm in both groups. A positive correlation emerged between the vestibulo-ocular reflex gain measured with both paradigms. Regarding the saccades, a negative correlation was observed between the overt saccades latency and amplitude measured with both paradigms.
conclusionThe new suppression head impulse paradigm complements the head impulse paradigm for a better evaluation of the vestibular function. The inconsistency of covert saccades in suppression head impulse paradigm makes it superior to head impulse paradigm in measuring vestibulo-ocular reflex gain, especially in patients with vestibular loss.
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.