Observational studyCoDAS2025
Is there a difference in the results of the video head impulse test in patients with a nosological diagnosis of Ménière's Disease and Vestibular Migraine?
Observational study in CoDAS, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) gain values, gain symmetry between the semicircular canals (SCCs), and saccadic parameters in patients with a nosological diagnosis of Ménière's disease (MD) and vestibular migraine (VM).
methodsObservational, descriptive, cross-sectional, retrospective study, approved by the Research Ethics Committee, under evaluation report number 4.462.519. The study was based on medical record analysis of individuals who underwent the Video Head Impulse Test (vHIT). The sample included medical records of 33 patients, divided into two groups - G1, 18 patients with a nosological diagnosis of VM; G2, 15 patients with MD. The study collected information on age, sex, nosological diagnosis, symptoms, associated comorbidities, and vHIT results. Student's t-test and the linear regression model statistically analyzed the data. The significance level was set at 0.05 (95%).
resultsFemales predominated (75.76%), with a mean age of 50.18 years. There was a predominance of normal VOR gain in the VM group (44.44%) and vestibular hypofunction in the MD group (40%). There was no significant difference between the groups' mean gain per SCC, nor between the groups' right and left SCCs. G1 had a higher percentage of evident saccades and saccadic dispersion.
conclusionAlthough there was no significant difference in VOR gain in the vHIT between the groups, there was a predominance of vestibular hypofunction in the MD group and normal results in the VM group.
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.