ArticleEar and hearing2024
Goggle Versus Remote-Camera Video Head Impulse Test Device Comparison.
Article in Ear and hearing, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study compared remote versus goggle video head impulse testing (vHIT) outcomes to validate remote-camera vHIT, which is gaining popularity in difficult to test populations.
designSeventeen controls and 10 individuals with vestibular dysfunction participated. Each participant completed remote-camera and goggle vHIT. The main outcome parameters were canal gain, frequency of corrective saccades, and a normal versus abnormal rating.
resultsHorizontal and vertical canal vHIT gain was significantly lower in the vestibular compared with the control group; remote-camera gains were significantly lower compared with goggle gain for the vestibular group only. The devices categorized control versus vestibular canals identically except for one vertical canal. In the vestibular group, there was not a significant difference in the percentage of compensatory saccades between devices.
conclusionThese data provide validation that results obtained with a remote-camera device are similar to those obtained using a standard goggle device.
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.