Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40730821›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Slow dynamics of human balance control.

Kyle J Missen, Mark G Carpenter, Lorenz Assländer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Kyle J MissenSchool of Kinesiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Mark G CarpenterSchool of Kinesiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Lorenz AssländerDepartment of Sport Science, Human Performance Research Centre, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany. lorenz.asslaender@uni-konstanz.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When standing on a tilting surface, humans' sway behavior at frequencies below 0.1 Hz indicates the contribution of a slow feedback component. We suggest this may reflect a self-calibration mechanism of the balance control system, constantly referencing orientation estimates based on kinematic sensory cues to a reference based on force cues. However, attempts to identify this mechanism have been limited by insufficient experimental trial durations and small sample sizes. This study aimed to assess the properties of the mechanism that reduces body sway at very low frequencies in upright standing. Anteroposterior body sway responses to short- and long-duration surface tilts were measured and interpreted using balance control models. Four feedback control model variants, with different mechanisms to account for the slow dynamics, were fit to experimental data. Furthermore, we tested how estimates of the slow component are affected by stimulus period duration. We hypothesized that the model variants containing force cues would provide the best fit to experimental sway responses, particularly in response to long-duration surface tilts. Our results confirm this hypothesis and suggest that humans use integrated force afferents from the feet and legs in a slow, positive feedback mechanism during standing to remain upright. Despite stimulus period durations of ~ 180 s, some properties of this mechanism were difficult to estimate. The positive torque feedback mechanism aligns with the notion of self-calibration.

Indexed as

Postural BalanceAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansMaleModels, BiologicalPostureStanding PositionYoung AdultBalance control modelPostural controlSelf-calibrationSensory integrationTorque feedback

Identifiers

PMID40730821
PMCPMC12307746

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.