Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27798720›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2017

Electrically Evoked Medial Olivocochlear Efferent Effects on Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions in Guinea Pigs.

Maria A Berezina-Greene, John J Guinan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maria A Berezina-GreeneEaton-Peabody Lab, Mass. Eye and Ear Infirmary, 243 Charles St., Boston, MA, 02114-3002, USA.
John J GuinanEaton-Peabody Lab, Mass. Eye and Ear Infirmary, 243 Charles St., Boston, MA, 02114-3002, USA. jjg@epl.meei.harvard.edu.
Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · US

Funding

TRAINING FOR SPEECH AND HEARING SCIENCEST32DC000038 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI Gwenaelle S Geleoc · 1992 to 2026
$21.8M
Imaging Core PlanP30DC005209 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY · PI LIBERMAN, M. CHARLES · 2002 to 2016
$12.0M
UNDERSTANDING OTOACOUSTIC EMISSIONSR01DC003687 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Christopher A Shera · 1999 to 2026
$9.8M
OLIVOCOCHLEAR EFFERENT SYSTEMS AND COCHLEAR PHYSIOLOGYR01DC000235 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI GUINAN, JOHN J · 1988 to 2012
$2.8M
NIDCD NIH HHS P30 DC005209NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC000235NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC003687NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC000038
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) are produced by cochlear irregularities reflecting energy from the peak region of the traveling wave (TW). Activation of medial olivocochlear (MOC) efferents reduces cochlear amplification and otoacoustic emissions (OAEs). In other OAEs, MOC activation can produce enhancements. The extent of MOC enhancements of SFOAEs has not been previously studied. In anesthetized guinea pigs, we electrically stimulated MOC fibers and recorded their effects on SFOAEs. MOC stimulation mostly inhibited SFOAEs but sometimes enhanced them. Some enhancements were not near response dips and therefore cannot be explained by a reduction of wavelet cancelations. MOC stimulation always inhibited auditory-nerve compound action potentials showing that cochlear-amplifier gain was not increased. We propose that some SFOAE enhancements arise because shocks excite only a small number of MOC fibers that inhibit a few scattered outer hair cells thereby changing (perhaps increasing) cochlear irregularities and SFOAE amplitudes. Contralateral sound activation is expected to excite approximately one third of MOC efferents and may also change cochlear irregularities. Some papers suggest that large SFOAE components originate far basal of the TW peak, basal of the region that receives cochlear amplification. Using a time-frequency analysis, we separated SFOAEs into components with different latencies. At all SFOAE latencies, most SFOAE components were inhibited by MOC stimulation, but some were enhanced. The MOC inhibition of short-latency SFOAE components is consistent with these components being produced in the cochlear-amplified region near the TW peak.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAnimalsCochleaEfferent PathwaysGuinea PigsOlivary NucleusOtoacoustic Emissions, SpontaneousCochlear irregularitiesCochlear mechanicsMedial olivocochlearSFOAE

Identifiers

PMID27798720
PMCPMC5243264
OpenAlexW2546207030

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.