ArticleBMC emergency medicine2026
Diagnostic accuracy of HINTS Plus test in the differential diagnosis of central and peripheral vertigo: a prospective, cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 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
backgroundWe evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the HINTS Plus tool in differentiating central vertigo from peripheral vertigo in the emergency department, using neuroimaging as the reference standard.
methodsThis cross-sectional study included adult patients with acute vestibular syndrome without focal neurological deficits. Crucially, all patients underwent neuroimaging with non-contrast brain tomography and magnetic resonance imaging to definitively exclude central pathology. Diagnostic accuracy of the HINTS Plus test was assessed by comparing bedside findings with neuroimaging results.
resultsOf 298 patients enrolled, 62 had central and 236 peripheral vertigo patients. The sensitivity and specificity of the HINTS Plus for detecting central vertigo were 80.65% (95% CI: 68.63-89.58) and 82.63% (95% CI: 77.18-87.24), respectively. The Head Impulse Test demonstrated the highest sensitivity (70.97%) among individual components.
conclusionHINTS Plus demonstrated moderate diagnostic accuracy in a real-world emergency department setting. Although useful as a bedside adjunct, the observed false-negative rate and LR- suggest that HINTS Plus should not be used as the sole strategy to exclude central causes of acute vestibular syndrome. Neuroimaging and overall clinical assessment remain essential components of diagnostic decision-making.
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.