ArticleInternational journal of audiology2015
Exploration of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning in hearing-impaired listeners.
Article in International journal of audiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characteristic of Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions: Detection Rate, Musical Training Influence, and Gain Function.Brain sciences · 2019Article
- Swept-tone stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions: Normative data and methodological considerations.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018Article
- Current Advances in Pharmacotherapy and Technology for Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review.Journal of ophthalmology · 2018Review
- Towards a joint reflection-distortion otoacoustic emission profile: Results in normal and impaired ears.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2017Article
- The influence of probe level on the tuning of stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions and behavioral test in human.Biomedical engineering online · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveOtoacoustic emissions (OAEs) can provide useful measures of tuning of auditory filters. We previously established that stimulus-frequency (SF) OAE suppression tuning curves (STCs) reflect major features of behavioral tuning (psychophysical tuning curves, PTCs) in normally-hearing listeners. Here, we aim to evaluate whether SFOAE STCs reflect changes in PTC tuning in cases of abnormal hearing.
designPTCs and SFOAE STCs were obtained at 1 kHz and/or 4 kHz probe frequencies. For exploratory purposes, we collected SFOAEs measured across a wide frequency range and contrasted them to commonly measured distortion product (DP) OAEs. STUDY SAMPLE: Thirteen listeners with varying degrees of sensorineural hearing loss.
resultsExcept for a few listeners with the most hearing loss, the listeners had normal/nearly normal PTCs. However, attempts to record SFOAE STCs in hearing-impaired listeners were challenging and sometimes unsuccessful due to the high level of noise at the SFOAE frequency, which is not a factor for DPOAEs. In cases of successful measurements of SFOAE STCs there was a large variability in agreement between SFOAE STC and PTC tuning.
conclusionsThese results indicate that SFOAE STCs cannot substitute for PTCs in cases of abnormal hearing, at least with the paradigm adopted in this study.
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.