Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26176553›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Central Auditory Processing of Temporal and Spectral-Variance Cues in Cochlear Implant Listeners.

Carol Q Pham, Peter Bremen, Weidong Shen, Shi-Ming Yang, John C Middlebrooks, Fan-Gang Zeng, Myles Mc Laughlin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Carol Q PhamCenter for Hearing Research, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America.
Peter BremenCenter for Hearing Research, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Otolaryngology- Head and Neck Surgery, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America.
Weidong ShenInstitute of Otolaryngology, Chinese PLA Genera Hospital, Beijing, China.
Shi-Ming YangInstitute of Otolaryngology, Chinese PLA Genera Hospital, Beijing, China.
John C MiddlebrooksCenter for Hearing Research, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Otolaryngology- Head and Neck Surgery, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Cognitive Sciences, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America.
Fan-Gang ZengCenter for Hearing Research, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Anatomy and Neurobiology, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Otolaryngology- Head and Neck Surgery, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Cognitive Sciences, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America.
Myles Mc LaughlinCenter for Hearing Research, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America; Department of Otolaryngology- Head and Neck Surgery, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America.

Funding

Institute for Clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR000153 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI COOPER, DAN M · 2012 to 2015
$12.1M
CORTICAL REPRESENTATION OF AUDITORY SPACER01DC000420 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MIDDLEBROOKS, JOHN C · 1995 to 2018
$6.5M
NRSA Training CoreTL1TR001415 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI CAIOZZO, VINCENT JAMES, HEAD, ELIZABETH · 2015 to 2023
$4.2M
NIDCD T32 Interdisciplinary Training Program in Hearing ResearchT32DC010775 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI Karina S Cramer, Raju Metherate · 2010 to 2026
$3.5M
UC Irvine Core Center for Hearing and Communication ResearchP30DC008369 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI ZENG, FAN-GANG · 2007 to 2016
$3.3M
Interactions between Acoustic and Electric StimulationR01DC008858 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI ZENG, FAN-GANG · 2007 to 2011
$1.8M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001415NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000153NIDCD NIH HHS P30 DC008369NIDCD NIH HHS P30-DC008369NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC000420NIDCD NIH HHS R01-DC000420NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC008858NIDCD NIH HHS R01-DC008858NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC010775NIDCD NIH HHS T32-DC010775
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cochlear implant (CI) listeners have difficulty understanding speech in complex listening environments. This deficit is thought to be largely due to peripheral encoding problems arising from current spread, which results in wide peripheral filters. In normal hearing (NH) listeners, central processing contributes to segregation of speech from competing sounds. We tested the hypothesis that basic central processing abilities are retained in post-lingually deaf CI listeners, but processing is hampered by degraded input from the periphery. In eight CI listeners, we measured auditory nerve compound action potentials to characterize peripheral filters. Then, we measured psychophysical detection thresholds in the presence of multi-electrode maskers placed either inside (peripheral masking) or outside (central masking) the peripheral filter. This was intended to distinguish peripheral from central contributions to signal detection. Introduction of temporal asynchrony between the signal and masker improved signal detection in both peripheral and central masking conditions for all CI listeners. Randomly varying components of the masker created spectral-variance cues, which seemed to benefit only two out of eight CI listeners. Contrastingly, the spectral-variance cues improved signal detection in all five NH listeners who listened to our CI simulation. Together these results indicate that widened peripheral filters significantly hamper central processing of spectral-variance cues but not of temporal cues in post-lingually deaf CI listeners. As indicated by two CI listeners in our study, however, post-lingually deaf CI listeners may retain some central processing abilities similar to NH listeners.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantsCuesAcoustic StimulationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAuditory PerceptionDemographyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNoisePerceptual MaskingSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID26176553
PMCPMC4503639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.