Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24110387›Full record

ArticleAnnual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference2013

Constant RMS versus constant peak modulation for the perceptual equivalence of sinusoidal amplitude modulated signals.

Oliver B Regele, Andrew S Koivuniemi, Kevin J Otto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Oliver B Regele
Andrew S Koivuniemi
Kevin J Otto

Funding

Indiana Medical Scientist/Engineer Training ProgramT32GM077229 · NIGMS · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI GASTON, BENJAMIN, HERBERT, BRITTNEY-SHEA · 2008 to 2022
$6.0M
Neural microstimulation parameters and interfacial quality effectsR03DC009339 · NIDCD · PURDUE UNIVERSITY · PI OTTO, KEVIN J. · 2009 to 2011
$422k
NIDCD NIH HHS R03 DC009339NIDCD NIH HHS R03-DC009339
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuroprosthetics using intracortical microstimulation can potentially alleviate sensory deprivation due to injury or disease. However the information bandwidth of a single microstimulation channel remains largely unanswered. This paper presents three experiments that examine the importance of Peak Power/Charge and RMS Power/Charge for detection of acoustic and electrical Sinusoidal Amplitude Modulated stimuli by the auditory system. While the peripheral auditory system is sensitive to RMS power cues for the detection of acoustic stimuli, here we provide results that suggest that the auditory cortex is sensitive to peak charge cues for electrical stimuli. Varying the modulation frequency and depth do not change this effect for detection of modulated electrical stimuli.

Indexed as

ElectricitySignal Processing, Computer-AssistedAcousticsAcoustic StimulationAnimalsAuditory CortexAuditory PerceptionCuesElectric StimulationMaleRatsRats, Sprague-Dawley

Identifiers

PMID24110387
PMCPMC4082400

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.