Vibration-induced postural reactions: a scoping review on parameters and populations studied
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Mechanical vibration is an effective way for externally activating Ia primary endings of the muscle spindles and skin mechanoreceptors. Despite its popularity in proprioception and postural control studies, there is still no review covering the wide variety of vibration parameters or locations used in studies. The main purpose of this scoping review was thus to give an overview of general vibration parameters and to identify, if available, the rationale for justifying methodological choices concerning vibration parameters. Methods: Three databases (Pubmed, CINHAL, and SPORTDiscus) were searched from inception to July 2022. Included articles were to focus on the study of muscle spindles and skin mechanoreceptors vibration in humans and assess postural control. Following inclusion, data regarding demographic information, populations, vibration parameters and rationale were extracted and summarized. Results: = 126). The parameters used varied widely but were most often around 80 Hz, at an amplitude of 1 mm for 10-20 s. Regarding rationales, nearly 50% of the studies did not include any, whereas those including one mainly cited the same two studies, without elaborating specifically on the parameter's choice. Conclusion: This scoping review provided a comprehensive description of the population recruited and parameters used for vibration protocols in current studies with humans. Despite many studies, there remain important gaps of knowledge that needs to be filled, especially for vibration amplitude and duration parameters in various populations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".