ArticlePloS one2014
Envelope enhancement increases cortical sensitivity to interaural envelope delays with acoustic and electric hearing.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pulse timing dominates binaural hearing with cochlear implants.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Decoding spatial attention with EEG and virtual acoustic space.Physiological reports · 2017Article
- A method to enhance the use of interaural time differences for cochlear implants in reverberant environments.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evidence from human psychophysical and animal electrophysiological studies suggests that sensitivity to interaural time delay (ITD) in the modulating envelope of a high-frequency carrier can be enhanced using half-wave rectified stimuli. Recent evidence has shown potential benefits of equivalent electrical stimuli to deaf individuals with bilateral cochlear implants (CIs). In the current study we assessed the effects of envelope shape on ITD sensitivity in the primary auditory cortex of normal-hearing ferrets, and profoundly-deaf animals with bilateral CIs. In normal-hearing animals, cortical sensitivity to ITDs (±1 ms in 0.1-ms steps) was assessed in response to dichotically-presented i) sinusoidal amplitude-modulated (SAM) and ii) half-wave rectified (HWR) tones (100-ms duration; 70 dB SPL) presented at the best-frequency of the unit over a range of modulation frequencies. In separate experiments, adult ferrets were deafened with neomycin administration and bilaterally-implanted with intra-cochlear electrode arrays. Electrically-evoked auditory brainstem responses (EABRs) were recorded in response to bipolar electrical stimulation of the apical pair of electrodes with singe biphasic current pulses (40 µs per phase) over a range of current levels to measure hearing thresholds. Subsequently, we recorded cortical sensitivity to ITDs (±800 µs in 80-µs steps) within the envelope of SAM and HWR biphasic-pulse trains (40 µs per phase; 6000 pulses per second, 100-ms duration) over a range of modulation frequencies. In normal-hearing animals, nearly a third of cortical neurons were sensitive to envelope-ITDs in response to SAM tones. In deaf animals with bilateral CI, the proportion of ITD-sensitive cortical neurons was approximately a fifth in response to SAM pulse trains. In normal-hearing and deaf animals with bilateral CI the proportion of ITD sensitive units and neural sensitivity to ITDs increased in response to HWR, compared with SAM stimuli. Consequently, novel stimulation strategies based on envelope enhancement may prove beneficial to individuals with bilateral cochlear implants.
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.