ArticleBiomedical engineering online2016
The influence of probe level on the tuning of stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions and behavioral test in human.
Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFrequency selectivity (FS) of the auditory system is established at the level of the cochlea and it is important for the perception of complex sounds. Although direct measurements of cochlear FS require surgical preparation, it can also be estimated with the measurements of otoacoustic emissions or behavioral tests, including stimulus frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning curves (SFOAE STCs) or psychophysical tuning curves (PTCs). These two methods result in similar estimates of FS at low probe levels. As the compressive nonlinearity of cochlea is strongly dependent on the stimulus intensity, the sharpness of tuning curves which is relevant to the cochlear nonlinearity will change as a function of probe level. The present study aims to investigate the influence of different probe levels on the relationship between SFOAE STCs and PTCs.
methodsThe study included 15 young subjects with normal hearing. SFOAE STCs and PTCs were recorded at low and moderate probe levels for frequencies centred at 1, 2, and 4 kHz. The ratio or the difference of the characteristic parameters between the two methods was calculated at each probe level. The effect of probe level on the ratio or the difference between the parameters of SFOAE STCs and PTCs was then statistically analysed.
resultsThe tuning of SFOAE STCs was significantly positively correlated with the tuning of the PTCs at both low and moderate probe levels; yet, at the moderate probe level, the SFOAE STCs were consistently broader than the PTCs. The mean ratio of sharpness of tuning at low probe levels was constantly around 1 while around 1.5 at moderate probe levels.
conclusionsProbe level had a significant effect on the sharpness of tuning between the two methods of estimating FS. SFOAE STC seems a good alternative measurement of PTC for FS assessment at low probe levels. At moderate probe levels, SFOAE STC and PTC were not equivalent measures of the FS in terms of their bandwidths. Because SFOAE STCs are not biased by higher levels auditory processing, they may represent cochlear FS better than PTCs.
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.