ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
Comparison of functional vestibulo-ocular reflex and cognitive functions in e-athletes and non-athletes.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07211191 (Comparison of Functional Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex and Cognitive Functions in E-Athletes and Non-Athletes), which is not on this 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.
Comparison of Functional Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex and Cognitive Functions in E-Athletes and Non-Athletes: A Cross-Sectional Case-Control Study
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEsports has become a global phenomenon, yet its cognitive and vestibular demands are less studied than in traditional sports. We compared visuospatial/short-term memory, reaction time, and functional vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) between e-athletes and non-athletes.
methodsIn this comparative cross-sectional study, eighteen e-athletes and eighteen age-matched controls (17-27 years) with normal/corrected vision and no neurological or psychiatric disorders were assessed. Cognitive performance was measured with the Stroop Test and Corsi Block Test (forward/backward spans). Functional VOR was evaluated using the Functional Head Impulse Test (fHIT). Group differences were tested with Mann-Whitney U (two-tailed, α = 0.05).
resultsE-athletes showed faster responses and fewer errors on the Stroop Test (Stroop V time: 15.80 ± 2.01 s vs. 18.42 ± 1.26 s, p < 0.001; Stroop IV errors: 0.27 ± 0.46 vs. 0.94 ± 0.53, p = 0.001) and higher Corsi spans (forward: 7.11 ± 0.83 vs. 5.66 ± 0.68, p < 0.001; backward: 5.83 ± 0.85 vs. 4.00 ± 0.78, p < 0.001). No significant differences between-group were observed on fHIT outcomes (p > 0.05).
conclusionsE-athletes exhibited superior attentional control and visuospatial memory, with no evidence of differences in functional VOR. Intensive gaming may selectively relate to executive and memory functions without influencing vestibular performance. Larger studies are warranted to confirm these findings and inform training/health applications.
trial registrationNCT07211191-22 / 09 / 2025.
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.