ArticleIranian journal of medical sciences2016
Auditory Brainstem Response Wave Amplitude Characteristics as a Diagnostic Tool in Children with Speech Delay with Unknown Causes.
Article in Iranian journal of medical sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Changes in the Proteomic Profile After Audiogenic Kindling in the Inferior Colliculus of the GASH/Sal Model of Epilepsy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Therapeutic effect of intraperitoneal dexamethasone on noise-induced permanent threshold shift in mice model.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Loss of C1q alters the auditory brainstem response.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2024Article
- A multi-channel EEG mini-cap can improve reliability for recording auditory brainstem responses in chinchillas.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2023Article
- Newborn Auditory Brainstem Responses in Children with Developmental Disabilities.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2023Article
- Precise detection of CRISPR-Cas9 editing in hair cells in the treatment of autosomal dominant hearing loss.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2022Article
- Event-Related Potentials Elicited by Phonetic Errors Differentiate Children With Speech Sound Disorder and Typically Developing Peers.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2021Article
- Article
- Changes in microRNA Expression in the Cochlear Nucleus and Inferior Colliculus after Acute Noise-Induced Hearing Loss.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- Effect of Umbilical Cord Ferritin Level on Auditory Brainstem Response Threshold in Newborns.Iranian journal of otorhinolaryngology · 2020Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Speech delay with an unknown cause is a problem among children. This diagnosis is the last differential diagnosis after observing normal findings in routine hearing tests. The present study was undertaken to determine whether auditory brainstem responses to click stimuli are different between normally developing children and children suffering from delayed speech with unknown causes. In this cross-sectional study, we compared click auditory brainstem responses between 261 children who were clinically diagnosed with delayed speech with unknown causes based on normal routine auditory test findings and neurological examinations and had >12 months of speech delay (case group) and 261 age- and sex-matched normally developing children (control group). Our results indicated that the case group exhibited significantly higher wave amplitude responses to click stimuli (waves I, III, and V) than did the control group (P=0.001). These amplitudes were significantly reduced after 1 year (P=0.001); however, they were still significantly higher than those of the control group (P=0.001). The significant differences were seen regardless of the age and the sex of the participants. There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups considering the latency of waves I, III, and V. In conclusion, the higher amplitudes of waves I, III, and V, which were observed in the auditory brainstem responses to click stimuli among the patients with speech delay with unknown causes, might be used as a diagnostic tool to track patients' improvement after treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27582591PMC4967486W2481342106What 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.