ArticlePloS one2025
Estimation of cervicocephalic kinesthetic perception and its correlation with fall risk in adults with diabetes and without diabetes experiencing cervical pain: A comparative study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThis study aimed to evaluate the relationship between cervicocephalic kinesthesia sensation and the incidence of falls in adults with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (DM-2) experiencing cervical pain.
methodsThe research was conducted between January 1, 2022, and August 15, 2022. A total of 60 participants were included, with an average age of 26.03 ± 3.45 years and an average BMI of 21.4 ± 2.05 kg/m². Participants were divided into two groups: an experimental group of adults with DM-2 and cervical pain, and a control group without DM-2 but with cervical pain.
resultsHead repositioning errors were significantly higher in the experimental group for right-side and left-side lateral flexion (P = 0.002). Forward flexion also showed a significant difference between groups (P = 0.006). However, no significant differences were observed between the groups in extension (P = 0.589). No considerable differences were noted in the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores between the groups.
conclusionsIndividuals with DM-2 experiencing neck pain exhibited minimal errors in head repositioning tests, yet no substantial alterations were evident in NDI and BBS scores.
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.