ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Concurrent VVOR and VORS profiling reveals a threshold-dependent VOR suppression deficit in vestibular migraine.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To define the dual profile of visual-vestibular integration in vestibular migraine (VM) by concurrently evaluating visually enhanced vestibulo-ocular reflex (VVOR) and vestibulo-ocular reflex suppression (VORS), and to determine which metric more closely reflects disease-related central vestibular dysfunction. Methods: In this retrospective case-control study, 57 patients with VM diagnosed according to the 2022 Bárány Society/ICHD-3 criteria and 30 healthy controls underwent VVOR and VORS testing using video-oculography during passive horizontal head rotation (0.5 Hz, ±15°). Clinical data were collected from medical records. Group differences in VVOR and VORS gains were analyzed, restricted cubic spline (RCS) regression combined with binary logistic regression was used to analyze the dose-response relationship between these indices and VM risk after adjusting for potential confounders. Results: Compared with controls, patients with VM showed significantly higher VVOR gains (mean: 1.4 ± 0.2 vs. 1.2 ± 0.2, Conclusion: This study provides the first simultaneous characterization of the enhancement and suppression arms of visual-vestibular integration in VM. The key contribution is the identification of a threshold-dependent VORS suppression deficit as a more specific indicator of VM-related central dysfunction, consistent with impaired cerebellar inhibitory control, whereas elevated VVOR appears to reflect a less specific adaptive response. These findings refine the physiological understanding of VM and support VORS-based stratification as a potential framework for mechanistic subtyping and targeted vestibular rehabilitation.
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.