Signs of spatial neglect in unilateral peripheral vestibulopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In this study, the question of whether egocentric representation of space is impaired in chronic unilateral vestibulopathies was examined. The objective was to test current theories attributing a predominant role to vestibular afferents in spatial cognition and to assess whether representational neglect signs are common in peripheral vestibular loss. METHODS: The subjective straight-ahead (SSA) direction was investigated using a horizontal rod allowing the translation and rotation components of the body midline representation to be dissociated in 21 patients with unilateral vestibular loss (right, 13; left, eight) and in 12 healthy controls. RESULTS: Compared to the controls, the patients with unilateral vestibulopathy showed a translation bias of their SSA, without rotation bias. The translation bias was not lateralized towards the lesioned side as typically found for biases reported after unilateral vestibular loss. Rather, the SSA bias was rightward whatever the side of the vestibular loss. The translation bias correlated with the vestibular loss, as measured by caloric response and vestibulo-ocular reflex gain, but not with the subjective visual vertical or the residual spontaneous nystagmus. CONCLUSION: The present data suggest that the dysfunctions of neural networks involved in egocentred and allocentred representations of space are differentially compensated for in unilateral vestibular defective patients. In particular, they suggest that asymmetrical vestibular inputs to cortical regions lead to representational spatial disturbances as does defective cortical processing of vestibular inputs in spatial neglect after right hemisphere stroke. They also highlight the predominant role of symmetrical and unaltered vestibular inputs in spatial cognition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".