ArticleScientific reports2025
Vestibular patients generate more regular head movements than healthy individuals during gaze-stabilization exercises.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The vestibular system is vital for maintaining stable vision during daily activities. When peripheral vestibular input is lost, patients initially experience impaired gaze stability due to reduced effectiveness of the vestibular-ocular-reflex pathway. To aid rehabilitation, patients are often prescribed gaze-stabilization exercises during which they make self-initiated active head movements. Analyzing statistical pattern of sequences of stereotyped behaviors to characterize degrees of randomness or repeatability has proven to be a powerful approach for diagnosing disease states, yet this approach has not been applied to patients with vestibular loss. Accordingly, here we investigated whether the patterning of head movements is altered in vestibular-loss patients by using trial-based analysis and sample-entropy measurement. The subjects completed gaze-stability exercises in both the yaw and pitch directions. In trial-based analysis, we calculated the trial-to-trial variability of head movement duration and peak velocity for each individual head movement. Our results showed that healthy individuals exhibited a temporally repetitive (correlated) structure in peak velocity, especially for head movements in the pitch direction, which was absent in most patients. In the sample entropy analysis, which measures the irregularity or randomness of a time series, our results revealed that head-movement generation was more regular in vestibular-loss patients compared to healthy controls. Together, these analyses suggest that vestibular-loss patients display less flexibility in the patterning of their head motions. Our results provide the first experimental evidence that temporal head stability is a valuable metric for distinguishing individuals with impaired vestibular function from healthy ones.
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.