ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2013
The polarity sensitivity of the electrically stimulated human auditory nerve measured at the level of the brainstem.
Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
35 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of morphometry, myelinization and synaptic current strength on spike conduction in human and cat spiral ganglion neurons.PloS one · 2013Trial
- Establishing reliable neural health measures in adult cochlear implant users.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Electrophysiological and Behavioral Programming Parameters in Patients with Facial Nerve Stimulation Post-Cochlear Implantation.The journal of international advanced otology · 2025Article
- Polarity sensitivity to symmetric, biphasic monopolar pulses is not a reliable indicator of peripheral axonal degeneration in human cochlear implant users.Frontiers in audiology and otology · 2025Article
- Artifact removal by template subtraction enables recordings of the frequency following response in cochlear-implant users.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cochlear Health and Cochlear-implant Function.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2023Review
- Electrical Field Interactions during Adjacent Electrode Stimulations: eABR Evaluation in Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Factors influencing the relationship between cochlear health measures and speech recognition in cochlear implant users.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2023Article
- Comparison of response properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve reported in human listeners and in animal models.Hearing research · 2022Review
- Characterizing Polarity Sensitivity in Cochlear Implant Recipients: Demographic Effects and Potential Implications for Estimating Neural Health.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2022Article
- Estimating health of the implanted cochlea using psychophysical strength-duration functions and electrode configuration.Hearing research · 2022Article
- Cochlear Implant Research and Development in the Twenty-first Century: A Critical Update.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2021Review
- Polarity Sensitivity of Human Auditory Nerve Fibers Based on Pulse Shape, Cochlear Implant Stimulation Strategy and Array.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- eABR THR Estimation Using High-Rate Multi-Pulse Stimulation in Cochlear Implant Users.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Effect of the Relative Timing between Same-Polarity Pulses on Thresholds and Loudness in Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2020Article
- The Effect of Phantom Stimulation and Pseudomonophasic Pulse Shapes on Pitch Perception by Cochlear Implant Listeners.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2020Article
- Ramped pulse shapes are more efficient for cochlear implant stimulation in an animal model.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Polarity Sensitivity as a Potential Correlate of Neural Degeneration in Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2020Article
- Investigation of Electrically Evoked Auditory Brainstem Responses to Multi-Pulse Stimulation of High Frequency in Cochlear Implant Users.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
- Evaluating Psychophysical Polarity Sensitivity as an Indirect Estimate of Neural Status in Cochlear Implant Listeners.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Recent behavioral studies have suggested that the human auditory nerve of cochlear implant (CI) users is mainly excited by the positive (anodic) polarity. Those findings were only obtained using asymmetric pseudomonophasic (PS) pulses where the effect of one phase was measured in the presence of a counteracting phase of opposite polarity, longer duration, and lower amplitude than the former phase. It was assumed that only the short high-amplitude phase was responsible for the excitation. Similarly, it has been shown that electrically evoked compound action potentials could only be obtained in response to the anodic phases of asymmetric pulses. Here, experiment 1 measured electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses to standard symmetric, PS, reversed pseudomonophasic, and reversed pseudomonophasic with inter-phase gap (6 ms) pulses presented for both polarities. Responses were time locked to the short high-amplitude phase of asymmetric pulses and were smaller, but still measurable, when that phase was cathodic than when it was anodic. This provides the first evidence that cathodic stimulation can excite the auditory system of human CI listeners and confirms that this stimulation is nevertheless less effective than for the anodic polarity. A second experiment studied the polarity sensitivity at different intensities by means of a loudness balancing task between pseudomonophasic anodic (PSA) and pseudomonophasic cathodic (PSC) stimuli. Previous studies had demonstrated greater sensitivity to anodic stimulation only for stimuli producing loud percepts. The results showed that PSC stimuli required higher amplitudes than PSA stimuli to reach the same loudness and that this held for current levels ranging from 10 to 100% of the dynamic range.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.