ArticleJournal of neurology2025
The need for speed: using nystagmus velocity profiles and machine learning models to separate canalithiasis BPV from its mimics.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Comprehensive Review of Nystagmus and Vertigo Diagnostics: From Pathological Foundations to AI-Driven Telemedicine.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSeparating BPV from other positional nystagmus types can be challenging. We examined the utility of nystagmus slow-phase velocity (SPV) profiles when seeking to separate canalithiasis benign positional vertigo (BPV) from its mimics.
methods231 eye-videos canalithiasis BPV were compared against 245 non-BPV positional nystagmus recordings whose diagnoses included: vestibular migraine, posterior fossa tumors, and cerebellar ataxia. A custom-written pupil-tracker generated 2D eye-position traces and plotted SPV as a function of time. Nystagmus onset latency, 50% rise time, peak velocity, peak latency, time to 50%, and 95% decay of SPV (T50 and T95) were recorded. Machine learning (ML) models were developed to separate BPV from non-BPV positional nystagmus.
resultsMedian nystagmus onset, 50% rise time, peak velocity, and peak latency were 0.789 s, 0.488 s, 36.530°/s, and 2.487 s for BPV and 0.321 s, 0 s, 9.306°/s, and 4.418 s for non-BPV groups. BPV demonstrated a paroxysmal profile with T50 and T95 of 3.062 s and 10.616 s; the non-BPV group had a T50 of 19.02 s and did not decay to 95% by 1000 s. All six metrics demonstrated significant differences in the dominant plane. Among the ML models tested, CatBoost achieved the highest performance with an accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 93.3, 92.7, and 93.9%. Statistical methods separated these two groups with an accuracy, a sensitivity, and a specificity of 87.4, 94.8, and 80.4%.
conclusionMachine learning models, when applied to SPV profiles, exceeded statistical methods and may prove useful when developing video-nystagmography-based diagnostic aids for non-experts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41238832What 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.