ArticleScientific reports2025
Brain power comparison between microgravity and head-down tilt bed rest: an electroencephalography approach.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study examines neurophysiological changes in microgravity by comparing EEG data from two ground analog 60-day head-down tilt bed rest (HDBR) experiments (ESA/DLR "Cocktail" and "RSL") and the NEUROSPAT experiment in space. The primary objective was to determine whether HDBR could effectively model spaceflight's impact on the human brain's EEG signal. In the HDBR dataset, increases in relative delta (2-4 Hz) (p < 0.01) and theta (4-8 Hz) (p < 0.001) power bands were observed during a two-month HDBR experiment, predominantly in the left temporal and parieto-occipital regions. Conversely, the NEUROSPAT dataset showed a significant increase in beta (12-30 Hz) (p < 0.05) power in the left somatosensory cortex during in-flight conditions, suggesting a potential adaptation to disrupted proprioceptive input and motor control in microgravity. The contrasting findings between the two datasets indicate that while HDBR can simulate some aspects of microgravity, it may not serve as a model for all central nervous system changes, especially those related to proprioception and motor functions. This highlights the need for further research, including larger sample sizes, consistent EEG recording conditions, and integration of additional physiological and cognitive markers to fully understand the effects of prolonged microgravity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.