ReviewFrontiers in neurology2025
The neural basis of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. The cVEMP is a specific indicator of saccular function.
Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Auditory contributions to postural and locomotor control: from basic research to clinical applications.Experimental brain research · 2026Review
- Vestibular function in degenerative parkinsonism.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Opinion: the neural basis of vestibular evoked myogenic potentials. The cVEMP is a specific indicator of saccular function.Frontiers in neurology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs) are widely used clinical vestibular tests and their interpretation is derived from the original proposal by Colebatch that the cVEMP is due to saccular activation by air conducted sound (ACS). This was based on previous extensive evidence that sounds selectively activate saccular afferent neurons and not semicircular canal neurons at clinical testing conditions. We revisit that earlier data and the results since. Despite that evidence, a recent partial review of the neural basis of cVEMPs has raised the possibility that canal afferents may be activated at clinical test frequencies and intensities and contribute to VEMPs, which would weaken their clinical specificity. This possibility is largely based on evidence that ACS clicks activate canal afferents in the rat - but not in the guinea pig. We show that result from the rat study is due to the very high sound pressure levels used - intensities which were far higher than those in the guinea pig study. When ACS stimuli of comparable intensity are used for both species at comparable clinically effective frequencies and intensities (~110 dB SPL), otolithic neurons are activated in both species but canal activation by ACS clicks is negligible (and so most probably in humans also). Furthermore, the evidence from lesion and electrical stimulation studies and human clinical data complements the neural evidence and confirms the cVEMP to ACS is a specific test of saccular function. Audibility curves show rats have very high thresholds for frequencies most commonly used for human VEMP testing (500-1000 Hz). That result questions the applicability of results of sound evoked vestibular responses from rat for understanding human vestibular function. There is a range of stimulus intensities and frequencies appropriate for measuring VEMPs. Using stimulus values within this range, neural evidence from rats and guinea pigs shows minimal contribution of canal afferents, meaning that VEMPs are specific tests of otolith function and that any contribution from semicircular canals to human cVEMPs (tones at 500 Hz, clicks at 100 dB nHL) is negligible. Using stimulus values outside that range will stimulate semicircular canal afferents as well as otolith afferents, thus compromising the otolithic specificity of VEMPs.
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.