ArticlePloS one2025
Kinesthetic illusions induced by muscle tendon vibration: The orientation of the vibration motor as a new methodological factor?
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PURPOSE/
aimTo investigate the impact of changing the rotational orientation of the vibrating motor on kinesthestic illusions. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty healthy individuals received vibration over the wrist flexor muscles of dominant and non-dominant sides (80 Hz, 1 mm, 10 seconds) using four conditions (3 trials/conditions) defined by the rotational direction of the vibrator's eccentric rotating mass according to the anatomical position: (1) proximodistal, (2) distoproximal, (3) mediolateral and (4) lateromedial. Non-parametric statistical analyses were used to compare illusion characteristics across conditions.
resultsLateromedial rotation created illusions that were more often in unexpected directions compared to the other rotational orientations. Distoproximal rotation was more likely to evoke kinesthetic illusions of wrist extension (76.8%) compared to lateromedial rotation (57.7%; p = 0.009). The latter led more frequently to complex/combined movement illusions (26.1%) especially with an ulnar deviation component (17.7%) compared to the other rotational directions.
conclusionResults from the present study demonstrated that the rotational orientation can influence illusory perceptions, but not to a great extent. Distoproximal rotation was more effective to elicit the expected illusions of wrist extension, compared to the lateromedial orientation that more often caused complex and variable perceptions of movement. Distoproximal rotation should thus be preferred if clear and reproducible perceptions are required and lateromedial might serve as a way of creating illusions more akin to everyday functional movements. Although the exact underlying mechanisms remain unclear, our work raises awareness on the importance of gaining a better understanding and control over methodological factors that could affect kinesthetic illusions.
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.