SynthesisPsychological research2024
A systematic review of human odometry.
Synthesis in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Human odometry refers to an individual's ability to travel between locations without eyesight and without designating a conscious effort toward spatially updating themselves as they travel through the environment. A systematic review on human odometry was completed for the purpose of establishing the state-of-the-art of the topic, and based on this information, develop meaningful hypotheses using Strong Inference. The following databases were searched up to February 16, 2023, and accessed through University of Nebraska at Omaha proxied databases: IEEEXplore, PsycArticles, PsycInfo, PubMed Central, SCOPUS, and Web of Science. Of the 7,060 articles reviewed, 23 met our inclusion criteria and were accumulated for their contents and quality. Methodologies, limitations, strengths, and future solutions based on those 23 articles are discussed. In summary, young healthy adults are the typical population examined, and distance perception can be manipulated with distance or gait type. Odometry can be studied using simple measurement tools, participants are often given 3-4 attempts to correctly perceive an average distance of 14.3 m, and the average article is of moderate quality with a mean score of 6.13. Many literature gaps, variability in methodology, and insufficient detail, can be amended by the addition of slightly more detailed manuscripts in future publications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39546051What 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.