ArticleThe Journal of physiology2025
Balance control threshold to vestibular stimuli.
Article in The Journal of physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrical vestibular stimulation to improve balance in older adults: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Study on the regulatory effect of magnetic vestibular stimulation on visually induced motion sickness.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- Motion sensations, postural sway, and side effects for copolar galvanic vestibular stimulation.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Quantifying Changes in Balance, Gait, Fall Risk, and Sensory Reweighting in Older Adults Following Multi-Session Electrical Vestibular Stimulation Therapy.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Bipedalism renders our erect posture unstable, requiring the integration and processing of multisensory information to remain upright. To understand how each sense contributes to balance, perceptual thresholds to isolated sensory disturbances while standing are typically quantified. Perception, however, is distinct from balance control. Both processes rely on distinct internal body representations, and participants can misattribute the consequences of self-generated balance-correcting actions as an external perturbation. Here, we used signal detection theory to quantify non-perceptual balance control thresholds to isolated vestibular stimuli given the role of vestibular cues in generating balance-correcting responses. We exposed participants standing on force plates to electrical vestibular stimulation (EVS) at varying amplitudes (0.2, 0.4, 0.6 mA) and frequencies (0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1 Hz). Stimuli delivered at 0.2 mA (0.1-0.5 Hz) and 0.4 mA (0.1, 0.2 Hz) remained unperceived but evoked whole-body responses above the sensorimotor noise underlying balance control. Balance control thresholds ranged from 0.09 to 0.57 mA; they increased with EVS amplitude and decreased with frequency. The physiological mechanisms underlying these EVS amplitude and frequency effects involved a decrease in response gain with increased stimulus amplitude and a reduction in response variability with increased stimulus frequency. Our findings demonstrate that balance responses to isolated vestibular stimuli can be quantified below perceptual thresholds and highlight the dynamic regulation of response gain and the influence of whole-body motion variability in the vestibular control of balance. Our results also open the door to assessing the isolated vestibular contributions to postural control in people with balance impairments. KEY POINTS: Upright balance control relies on sensory information from multiple sensory systems, but balance control thresholds to isolated sensory stimuli remain largely unknown because these stimuli, or their associated responses, can be perceived. We applied isolated electrical vestibular perturbations and used signal detection theory to quantify balance control thresholds to unperceived sensory stimuli. Vestibular stimuli delivered at 0.2 mA (0.1-0.5 Hz) and 0.4 mA (0.1 and 0.2 Hz) remained unperceived but evoked balance-correcting responses above the sensorimotor noise underlying the control of standing. Balance thresholds increased with current amplitude (0.2-0.6 mA) and decreased with stimulus frequency (0.1-1 Hz) and were linked to decreased gain of lateral force and reduced lateral force variability as current amplitude and frequency increased, respectively. These results pave the way for uncovering the sensory contributions to the non-perceptual mechanisms regulating balance-correcting motor commands essential for bipedalism and their potential role in balance impairments.
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.