ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2025
Clinical study on the optimal rotational stimulation for the unilateral centrifugation subjective visual vertical test.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Editorial: Unraveling the complexity of sensory space perception.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
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
Objective: To investigate the optimal stimulation intensity and reference range of the unilateral centrifugation subjective visual vertical (UC-SVV) test and to fill the technical gap in otolithic function evaluation in patients with peripheral vestibular diseases. Method: Forty healthy subjects (median age 28 years) underwent a UC-SVV test at rotation speeds of 60, 120, 180, and 240 deg./s using the Neuro Kinetics Inc. (NKI) I-Portal 6.0 NOTC rotating chair system. The deviation angles of the UC-SVV line in the centre and left/right positions at each rotation speed were recorded and analysed. Results: Forty healthy subjects completed the test. The deviation angle of the UC-SVV line differed according to the rotation speed (60, 120, 180, and 240 deg./s). At each rotation speed, the position of the rotation axis (left/centre/right position) affected the deviation angle and direction of the UC-SVV line. At each position of the rotation axis, the rotation speed also affected the deviation angle. When the rotation chair was translated to the left and right positions, the UC-SVV line deviated to the right and left sides, respectively, and the deviation angle increased with increasing rotation speed. The deviation angle at 60 deg./s was significantly less than that at 180 and 240 deg./s ( Conclusion: This study preliminarily discussed the deviation direction and angle of the UC-SVV line under different stimulation intensities in a range of healthy middle-aged subjects. The optimal stimulation intensity for the UC-SVV test is suggested to be 180 or 240 deg./s. Specifically, the peak rotation speed could be 180 deg./s if the subject is unable to tolerate high-speed rotation. This study provides support for improving this technology for evaluation of otolith function and its diagnostic significance in peripheral vestibular diseases.
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.