ArticleJournal of oral rehabilitation2026
Jaw Muscle Electromyographic Response to Whole-Body Postural Perturbation.
Article in Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile whole-body postural control requires integration of the sensorimotor system, the involvement of jaw muscle activity in this control remains unclear.
objectiveThis study aimed to clarify the relationship between jaw muscle activity and whole-body postural stability by measuring jaw-opening and closing muscle activities, as well as whole-body postural sway during postural perturbations with two different levels of predictability.
methodsTwelve healthy adults (7 males, 5 females; median age 21.0 years) underwent vertical perturbations by holding a bar at shoulder height. In the cued condition (C-cond), the participants were given a 3-s countdown before the bar was loaded with 3% of their body weight, whereas in the uncued condition (U-cond), the load was applied without prior cueing. Jaw-closing (masseter) and jaw-opening (anterior suprahyoid) muscle activities were measured using surface electromyography (EMG). Bar dynamics and center-of-foot-pressure (COP) were assessed with motion capture and a force plate. Bar-drop distances, EMG activity, and the proportion of trials with muscle activity exceeding baseline were compared between conditions using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Friedman, Mann-Whitney U and chi-square tests, as appropriate, with Bonferroni corrections.
resultsVertical bar displacement was greater in the U-cond compared with the C-cond (-46.0 mm vs. -27.4 mm, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, p < 0.05). Left anterior suprahyoid activity exceeded baseline in 91.7% of uncued trials versus 58.3% in cued trials (the chi-square test with the Bonferroni correction applied, adjusted p < 0.05). COP displacement increased when masseter and anterior suprahyoid muscle activity exceeded baseline in the U-cond (the Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction, adjusted p < 0.05).
conclusionIncreased activation of jaw-opening muscles during uncued perturbations compared with cued perturbations suggests that anterior suprahyoid muscles are recruited for postural control, supporting their involvement in maintaining stability.
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.