ArticleBrain and behavior2026
Visual-Vestibular Modification of Egomotion Perception in Patients With Persistent Postural-Perceptual Dizziness in Supine and Standing Positions.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2026. 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.
- Vestibular and visual influence on postural stability and egomotion perception in persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD).Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Visual-Vestibular Modification of Egomotion Perception in Patients With Persistent Postural-Perceptual Dizziness in Supine and Standing Positions.Brain and behavior · 2026Article
- Attentional dysfunction in persistent postural-perceptual dizziness: a narrative review of mechanistic evidence.Frontiers in neurology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPersistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD) has been classified by the Bárány Society as a chronic functional dizziness disorder with perceived unsteadiness. Symptoms typically worsen by upright posture or exposure to moving visual stimuli or complex visual patterns. The specific visual features remain poorly defined. We investigated how visual, vestibular, and combined visual-vestibular stimulation affects egomotion perception in PPPD patients, comparing responses in upright and supine positions to those of age-matched healthy controls (HC).
methodsParticipants performed a self-rating of perceived egomotion in two sessions with two different body positions: supine and upright standing. During both sessions, participants were exposed to three types of visual stimulation designed to differ by the degree of elicited egomotion: a black-and-white silent movie, a flow field animation, and a rollercoaster video from the driver's perspective. Each visual stimulus was presented in combination with one of three binaural vestibular galvanic stimulation conditions (GVS): no stimulation (noGVS), fixed intensity stimulation (fixGVS: 1.3 mA), or sham (sham: 1.3 mA).
resultsPPPD patients consistently reported stronger egomotion than HC, regardless of the stimulation condition. Both visual and vestibular inputs robustly influenced egomotion perception in standing and supine positions. Egomotion perception of PPPD patients in the standing, compared to the supine position, was larger during rollercoaster stimulation.
conclusionOur findings challenge the notion of generalized visual hypersensitivity in PPPD. They rather point to a context-dependent alteration of egomotion perception during upright stance. Differences disappear with concomitant vestibular stimulation supporting the need for vestibular rehabilitation in PPPD.
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.