ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Cervical Sensorimotor Function Tests Using a VR Headset-An Evaluation of Concurrent Validity.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity and Reliability of an Immersive Virtual Reality System for Multidimensional Assessment of Cervical Sensorimotor Control: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2026Article
- Assessment of the Reliability of a Laser-Based Visuomotor Feedback Device for Assessing Head Movement Control in Chronic Neck Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Sensorimotor disturbances such as disturbed cervical joint position sense (JPS) and reduced reaction time and velocity in fast cervical movements have been demonstrated in people with neck pain. While these sensorimotor functions have been assessed mainly in movement science laboratories, new sensor technology enables objective assessments in the clinic. The aim was to investigate concurrent validity of a VR-based JPS test and a new cervical reaction acuity (CRA) test. Twenty participants, thirteen asymptomatic and seven with neck pain, participated in this cross-sectional study. The JPS test, including outcome measures of absolute error (AE), constant error (CE), and variable error (VE), and the CRA test, including outcome measures of reaction time and maximum velocity, were performed using a VR headset and compared to a gold standard optical motion capture system. The mean bias (assessed with the Bland-Altman method) between VR and the gold standard system ranged from 0.0° to 2.4° for the JPS test variables. For the CRA test, reaction times demonstrated a mean bias of -19.9 milliseconds (ms), and maximum velocity a mean bias of -6.5 degrees per seconds (°/s). The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between VR and gold standard were good to excellent (ICC 0.835-0.998) for the JPS test, and excellent (ICC 0.931-0.954) for reaction time and maximum velocity for the CRA test. The results show acceptable concurrent validity for the VR technology for assessment of JPS and CRA. A slightly larger bias was observed in JPS left rotation which should be considered in future research.
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.