MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412708258 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-12683-3

Motion sickness susceptibility modulates the impact of electrical vestibular stimulation on postural control

2025· article· en· W4412708258 on OpenAlexafffund
Karina Moïn-Darbari, Daniel Paromov, Benoit-Antoine Bacon, Maxime Maheu, François Champoux

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMotion sicknessVestibular systemSomatosensory systemPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPosturographySensationEyes openBalance (ability)Galvanic vestibular stimulationSensory systemAudiologyPsychologyStimulationPostural instabilityMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motion sickness is defined as a sensation of uneasiness that occurs during physical motion, such as transportation by bus, plane, car or train. Postural control is one of the multisensory processes that has been examined in individuals susceptible to motion sickness. Indeed, postural control relies on visual, somatosensory and vestibular information. While studies suggest normal-like postural control during quiet standing, others suggest that individuals with motion sickness show increased postural instability during sensory perturbations, namely during visual and somatosensory disturbances. The impact of vestibular stimulation on postural control in individuals with motion sickness has yet to be determined. Therefore, the aim of the present exploratory study was to examine the effects of sinusoidal electrical vestibular stimulation on postural control in individuals with varying degrees of motion sickness. Fifty participants were divided into three groups based their susceptibility to motion sickness. Participants were initially tested at baseline in the four postural conditions of the modified Clinical Test of Sensory Integration and Balance protocol (mCTSIB): eyes open on firm surface, eyes closed on firm surface, eyes open on foam surface, eyes closed on foam surface. These four conditions were then repeated during sinusoidal electrical vestibular stimulation (EVS) of 1 mA at 1 Hz. In baseline conditions, no significant group differences in postural control were found. Data in experimental (EVS) conditions, however, suggests that individuals with high susceptibility to motion sickness are more impacted by vestibular stimulation, specifically in the eyes closed on firm surface condition. It has been suggested that motion sickness could be the result of an altered multisensory integration process. While the present data do not allow us to answer this question, it would remain important to examine all types of sensory perturbations and combinations thereof in a larger group of individuals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicVestibular and auditory disorders→French-language works237,207→