ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2015
Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emission Delays and Generating Mechanisms in Guinea Pigs, Chinchillas, and Simulations.
Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Suppression of Low-Frequency Tones in the Organ of Corti Vibrations of the Basal Turn in the Mongolian Gerbil Cochlea.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Article
- On the Sharpness of Auditory Filters: Considering Subclinical Deficits Reveals Sharper Otoacoustic Emission Estimates of Frequency Selectivity in Humans.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Article
- Detection of mild sensory hearing loss using a joint reflection-distortion otoacoustic emission profile.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024Article
- Medial olivocochlear reflex effects on amplitude growth functions of long- and short-latency components of click-evoked otoacoustic emissions in humans.Journal of neurophysiology · 2021Article
- Relationship Between Behavioral and Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions Delay-Based Tuning Estimates.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2020Article
- Electrically Evoked Medial Olivocochlear Efferent Effects on Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions in Guinea Pigs.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2017Article
- Localization of the Reflection Sources of Stimulus-Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 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
According to coherent reflection theory (CRT), stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) arise from cochlear irregularities coherently reflecting energy from basilar membrane motion within the traveling-wave peak. This reflected energy arrives in the ear canal predominantly with a single delay at each frequency. However, data from humans and animals indicate that (1) SFOAEs can have multiple delay components, (2) low-frequency SFOAE delays are too short to be accounted for by CRT, and (3) "SFOAEs" obtained with a 2nd ("suppressor") tone ≥2 octaves above the probe tone have been interpreted as arising from the area basal to the region of cochlear amplification. To explore these issues, we collected SFOAEs by the suppression method in guinea pigs and time-frequency analyzed these data, simulated SFOAEs, and published chinchilla SFOAEs. Time-frequency analysis revealed that most frequencies showed only one SFOAE delay component while other frequencies had multiple components including some with short delays. We found no systematic patterns in the occurrence of multiple delay components. Using a cochlear model that had significant basilar membrane motion only in the peak region of the traveling wave, simulated SFOAEs had single and multiple delay components similar to the animal SFOAEs. This result indicates that multiple components (including ones with short delays) can originate from cochlear mechanical irregularities in the SFOAE peak region and are not necessarily indicative of SFOAE sources in regions ≥2 octaves basal of the SFOAE peak region. We conclude that SFOAEs obtained with suppressors close to the probe frequency provide information primarily about the mechanical response in the region that receives amplification, and we attribute the too-short SFOAE delays at low frequencies to distortion-source SFOAEs and coherent reflection from multiple cochlear motions. Our findings suggest that CRT needs revision to include reflections from multiple motions in the cochlear apex.
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.