ArticleBiomedical engineering online2025
Identification of anatomical locations: its relevance for vibrotactile perception of individuals with Parkinson's disease.
Article in Biomedical engineering online, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVibrotactile input is a useful sensory cue for individuals with Parkinson's Disease (PD) to overcome freezing of gait (FoG). For this input to serve as a cue, its accurate perception is required. This needs the input to be delivered at an anatomical location where it can be perceived. This is particularly true for individuals with PD whose tactile perception differs from that of healthy individuals. Literature indicates choice of various anatomical locations e.g., Finger, Wrist, Thigh, Shin, Calf, Ankle, Achilles Tendon, Heel and torso for the application of vibrotactile stimulation. Though studies have focused on the comparison of the vibrotactile perception (based on feedback) at various anatomical locations, yet these have involved only healthy individuals. However, such exploration remains as majorly untouched for individuals with PD.
methodsTo bridge this gap, here we have conducted a study using our vibrotactile stimulation system while involving twenty-one individuals with PD to understand the choice of anatomical location with regard to vibrotactile perception. In addition, our study involved twenty-one age-matched healthy individuals to understand possible differences if any in vibrotactile perception between the two groups of participants.
resultsOur results showed that for the healthy participants, both 'Wrist' and 'Thigh' were equally strong anatomical locations with regard to vibrotactile perception that were correctly identified 100% of the time closely followed by 'Finger' for which the correct identification was 98% of the time with correct identification for all these three locations being statistically (p < 0.05) higher than the other locations. In contrast, for individuals with PD, the 'Thigh' emerged as a strong candidate anatomical location with regard to vibrotactile perception even for those with severity of symptoms (based on clinical measure) that was correctly identified 96% of the time followed by 'Wrist' for which the correct identification was 92% of the time with the correct identification for only the 'Thigh' being statistically (p < 0.05) higher than all the other locations (except 'Wrist').
conclusionThis finding is clinically significant in deciding the right anatomical location to offer vibrotactile cues for it to be correctly perceived by one with PD, providing assistance to overcome FoG.
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.