Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39576257›Full record

ReviewExperimental physiology2025

Measuring position sense.

Uwe Proske

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Experimental physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Measuring position sense.Experimental physiology · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Uwe ProskeSchool of Biomedical Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8776-8431

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Position sense is arguably more important than any of the other proprioceptive senses, because it provides us with information about the position of our body and limbs in relationship to one another and to our surroundings; it has been considered to contribute to our self-awareness. There is currently no consensus over the best method of measuring position sense. We have recently measured position sense with three commonly used methods. These were two-arm matching, one-arm pointing and one-arm repositioning, all carried out by blindfolded subjects with their lightly loaded forearms moving in the sagittal plane. It is currently believed that muscle spindles are the principal position sensors. We posed the question, was there evidence for spindles participating in the generation of position sense with each method? The indicator of spindle activity we used was the presence of thixotropic errors in the position signal, in response to conditioning voluntary contractions of forearm muscles. Based on this criterion, there was evidence of spindles contributing to position sense with all three methods. It was concluded that the spindle contribution to the position signal and the extent to which this was processed centrally was different with each method. It is argued that a case could be made for the existence of more than one position sense. Differences between the methods have implications for their meaning in a clinical setting.

Indexed as

Muscle SpindlesProprioceptionAdultElectromyographyFemaleForearmHumansMaleMuscle ContractionMuscle, SkeletalYoung Adultantagonist musclemuscle spindleposition sensethixotropyvoluntary contraction

Identifiers

PMID39576257
PMCPMC12486330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.