Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41821628›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology

Critical evaluation of the benefits and limitations of foam posturography in vestibular disorders: a narrative review.

Mitesh Patel, Carl Walter, Per-Anders Fransson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mitesh PatelNorth Wales Medical School, Bangor University, Bangor, United Kingdom.
Carl WalterDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Per-Anders FranssonDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review synthesises current evidence on the clinical utility of foam-based posturography in the assessment of vestibular pathologies. It critically evaluates: (1) the physiological mechanisms underlying foam posturography and its capacity to determine vestibular contributions; (2) methodological variability across testing protocols, including differences in foam properties, stance conditions and measurement parameters; (3) the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and reliability of foam posturography in various vestibular disorders; (4) its performance relative to other balance and vestibular assessments to determine reciprocity; and (5) its applications in rehabilitation. The review also highlights current gaps and challenges, proposing future directions aimed at standardising foam posturography protocols and strengthening their integration into routine clinical practice as part of comprehensive vestibular assessment. Foam posturography is a robust, reliable, and cost-effective method that alters the reliability and quality of somatosensory input to evaluate the role of vestibular function. It provides objective measures to support the diagnosis of vestibulopathies and distinguish between pathologies and monitor the results of rehabilitation. Limitations include non-standardised methodology and availability of normative data. However, its affordability and portability make it a practical and valuable adjunct in both clinical and research settings.

Indexed as

applicationsclinical utilitydiagnostic sensitivityfoammethodological variabilityperformanceposturography

Identifiers

PMID41821628
PMCPMC12975558

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.