Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41507877›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2026

Learning effects during balance analysis on a modified posturomed-platform in healthy dogs.

Wolszky Viola, Zablotski Yury, Lauer Susanne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Wolszky ViolaSmall Animal Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Leipzig University, Leipzig, 04103, Germany.
Zablotski YuryLMU Small Animal Clinic, Centre for Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, 80539, Germany.
Lauer SusanneLMU Small Animal Clinic, Centre for Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Munich, 80539, Germany. s.lauer@lmu.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPosturographic balance assessments are increasingly used in veterinary medicine, yet potential learning effects during evaluation remain unstudied. This study investigated learning effects in static, slow-dynamic, and fast-dynamic posturography using a modified Posturomed platform in healthy dogs. MATERIAL AND

methodsHealthy adult dogs (n = 20) were positioned longitudinally on a pressure sensitive modified balance platform (Posturomed-FDM-JS, Zebris, Isny, Germany). Five static, slow-dynamic and fast-dynamic posturographic trials were recorded (duration: 20s) and repeated three times over three weeks. Center of pressure (COP) parameters-COP-path-length (PL, mm), 95% COP-confidence-ellipse-area (CEA, mm

resultsUnder static conditions, none of the COP-parameters differed significantly across time points (all p-values > 0.448). Under slow-dynamic conditions, all COP-parameters decreased significantly between time points 1 and 2 (all p values < 0.0007) but remained stable thereafter (all p-values > 0.159). Under fast-dynamic conditions, all COP-parameters decreased significantly from time point to time point (all p-values < 0.034), except for CEA between time points 1 and 3 (p = 0.0759) and 2 and 3 (p = 0.999). Differences among trials occurred only at the first time point under dynamic conditions and were more pronounced under fast-dynamic conditions.

conclusionsNo learning effects were observed during static posturography in healthy adult dogs. However, training effects must be considered in both slow- and fast-dynamic posturography.

Indexed as

LearningPostural BalanceAnimalsDogsFemaleMaleCenter of pressureDogsLearning effectsPosturographyPosturomed

Identifiers

PMID41507877
PMCPMC12849616

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.