| Title |
Subjective Visual Vertical in Various Vestibular Disorders by Using a Simple Bucket Test
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12070-014-0760-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Naik Chetana, Rane Jayesh |
| Abstract |
Subjective Visual Vertical (S.V.V.) assesses the ability to perceive verticality which depends on visual, vestibular and somatosensory inputs. The judgment of verticality is altered when there is otolith dysfunction. Objective of our study was to present a simple method to assess S.V.V. and to analyze S.V.V. changes in various vestibular disorders. 100 subjects presenting with vestibular disorders in period of 1 year 2 months were subjected to Neurotological history and examination. Patients with non-vestibular causes were excluded. S.V.V was tested with a simple innovative device-a specially designed bucket. The angle of deviation from vertical was noted in degrees. Normal deviation is 0 ± 2°. Out of 23 patients with vestibular neuritis 83 % showed abnormal S.V.V. Amongst 11 patients of Meniere's disease, 55 % and 42 patients of BPPV, 71 % had abnormal S.V.V. Amongst 24 patients with other causes 15 % showed abnormal S.V.V. S.V.V is a reliable screening tool in assessment of vestibular dysfunction along with other clinical tests. It has a prognostic value during recovery following vestibular damage. The modified 'Bucket' is a simple, easy to use and cost-effective device to do the S.V.V. in daily practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| Portugal | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 21% |
| Unknown | 21 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 15% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 25 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 October 2018.
All research outputs
#6,860,107
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery
#81
of 744 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,930
of 234,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 744 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 234,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.