ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2024
Tactile localization accuracy at the low back.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data-driven design guide for vibrotactile display layouts by continuous mapping.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Vibrotactile spatial acuity on the back.Perception · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Localizing tactile stimulation is an important capability for everyday function and may be impaired in people with persistent pain. This study sought to provide a detailed description of lumbar spine tactile localization accuracy in healthy individuals. Sixty-nine healthy participants estimated where they were touched at nine different points, labelled in a 3 × 3 grid over the lumbar spine. Mislocalization between the perceived and actual stimulus was calculated in horizontal (x) and vertical (y) directions, and a derived hypotenuse (c) mislocalization was calculated to represent the direct distance between perceived and actual points. In the horizontal direction, midline sites had the smallest mislocalization. Participants exhibited greater mislocalization for left- and right-sided sites, perceiving sites more laterally than they actually were. For all vertical values, stimulated sites were perceived lower than reality. A greater inaccuracy was observed in the vertical direction. This study measured tactile localization for the low back utilizing a novel testing method. The large inaccuracies point to a possible distortion in the underlying perceptual maps informing the superficial schema; however, further testing comparing this novel method with an established tactile localization task, such as the point-to-point method, is suggested to confirm these findings.
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.