ArticleApplied psychophysiology and biofeedback2026
The Relationship Between Psychological Factors and Postural Performance under Different Biofeedback Conditions.
Article in Applied psychophysiology and biofeedback, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The postural biofeedback technique has been of potential interest to postural rehabilitation, as it promotes conscious postural control and reduces sway, ensuring body stability. However, it remains unclear whether the enhanced awareness of postural performance with biofeedback influences psychological states. Existing research suggests that psychological states such as confidence and anxiety regarding postural and fall risk may impact postural control. This study investigated the effects of two postural biofeedback techniques on balance confidence and anxiety, as well as the association between posturographic parameters and confidence and anxiety, respectively. Twenty-six participants were tested in three 60s tasks on a force platform: (1) eyes open (EO); (2) posturographic biofeedback (BF-COP), requiring participants to keep the centre of pressure (COP) close to a visual target; (3) laser biofeedback (BF-Laser), involving pointing a handheld laser at the same target with right wrist movements. The following COP parameters were computed: sway area, standard deviation, mean velocity and mean frequency in the antero-posterior (AP) and medio-lateral (ML) directions. Balance confidence and anxiety were assessed after each task using visual analog scales (0–100). ANOVA revealed lower balance confidence in the BF-COP task (mean ± SD; 73 ± 22%) compared to EO (86 ± 22%). For the anxiety scale, no significant differences were found between EO (21 ± 33%), BF-COP (28 ± 25%) and BF-Laser (24 ± 30%). For the BF-COP task, sway area, ML standard deviation, and ML mean velocity showed a negative moderate correlation with balance confidence, with greater body sway corresponding to lower confidence. Current findings suggest that psychological factors may be associated with postural stability changes during the postural biofeedback.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41874877What 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.