Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25787954›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2015

The influence of cochlear spectral processing on the timing and amplitude of the speech-evoked auditory brain stem response.

Helen E Nuttall, David R Moore, Johanna G Barry, Katrin Krumbholz, Jessica de Boer

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Noise-Induced Changes of the Auditory Brainstem Response to Speech-a Measure of Neural Desynchronisation?Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Role of Age-Related Declines in Subcortical Auditory Processing in Speech Perception in Noise.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2016
    Article
  9. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Helen E NuttallMRC Institute of Hearing Research, University Park, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Department of Speech, Hearing and Phonetic Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom; and.
David R MooreMRC Institute of Hearing Research, University Park, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Communication Sciences Research Center, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Johanna G BarryMRC Institute of Hearing Research, University Park, Nottingham, United Kingdom;
Katrin KrumbholzMRC Institute of Hearing Research, University Park, Nottingham, United Kingdom;
Jessica de BoerMRC Institute of Hearing Research, University Park, Nottingham, United Kingdom; jdb@ihr.mrc.ac.uk.
MRC Institute of Hearing Research · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U135097128Medical Research Council MC_U135097130
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The speech-evoked auditory brain stem response (speech ABR) is widely considered to provide an index of the quality of neural temporal encoding in the central auditory pathway. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the extent to which the speech ABR is shaped by spectral processing in the cochlea. High-pass noise masking was used to record speech ABRs from delimited octave-wide frequency bands between 0.5 and 8 kHz in normal-hearing young adults. The latency of the frequency-delimited responses decreased from the lowest to the highest frequency band by up to 3.6 ms. The observed frequency-latency function was compatible with model predictions based on wave V of the click ABR. The frequency-delimited speech ABR amplitude was largest in the 2- to 4-kHz frequency band and decreased toward both higher and lower frequency bands despite the predominance of low-frequency energy in the speech stimulus. We argue that the frequency dependence of speech ABR latency and amplitude results from the decrease in cochlear filter width with decreasing frequency. The results suggest that the amplitude and latency of the speech ABR may reflect interindividual differences in cochlear, as well as central, processing. The high-pass noise-masking technique provides a useful tool for differentiating between peripheral and central effects on the speech ABR. It can be used for further elucidating the neural basis of the perceptual speech deficits that have been associated with individual differences in speech ABR characteristics.

Indexed as

Mass SpectrometrySpeechAcoustic StimulationAdolescentAdultCochleaElectroencephalographyEvoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain StemFemaleHumansMalePsychoacousticsReaction TimeYoung Adultauditory filterauditory temporal processingcochlear response timespeech-evoked auditory brain stem responsespeech-in-noise

Identifiers

PMID25787954
PMCPMC4468972
OpenAlexW2313160117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.