ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Audiology2017
Big Stimulus, Little Ears: Safety in Administering Vestibular-Evoked Myogenic Potentials in Children.
Article in Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- American Academy of Audiology Clinical Consensus Statement: Assessment of Vestibular Function in the Pediatric Population.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2025Guideline
- Clinical consensus on vestibular infant screening.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Review
- Feasibility of Early Vestibular Screening and Developmental Changes in Air- and Bone-Conducted Cervical Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials in Infants and Children with Normal Hearing.Audiology research · 2025Article
- Novel cVEMP procedure reveals sexual dimorphism in peak to trough latency.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2025Article
- Electrode Montage for Bilateral Cervical Vestibular-Evoked Myogenic Potential Testing.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2024Article
- Effects of aging on ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potential using ER-3A insert earphone and B81 bone vibrator.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Effects of acoustic stimulation intensity on air-conducted vestibular evoked myogenic potential in children.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Effects of Tonic Muscle Activation on Amplitude-Modulated Cervical Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potentials (AMcVEMPs) in Young Females: Preliminary Findings.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2020Article
- Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential (VEMP) Test-retest Reliability in Children.Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2020Article
- Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in practice: Methods, pitfalls and clinical applications.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2019Review
- Quantitative Vestibular Function Testing in the Pediatric Population.Seminars in hearing · 2018Review
- Vestibular and Oculomotor Function in Children with Cerebral Palsy: A Scoping Review.Seminars in hearing · 2018Article
- Age Effects of Bone Conduction Vibration Vestibular-evoked Myogenic Potentials (VEMPs) Using B81 and Impulse Hammer Stimuli.Ear and hearingArticle
- Article
- Effects of High Sound Exposure During Air-Conducted Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential Testing in Children and Young Adults.Ear and hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCervical and ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials (VEMPs) have become common clinical vestibular assessments. However, VEMP testing requires high intensity stimuli, raising concerns regarding safety with children, where sound pressure levels may be higher due to their smaller ear canal volumes. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the range of peak-to-peak equivalent sound pressure levels (peSPLs) in child and adult ears in response to high intensity stimuli (i.e., 100 dB normal hearing level [nHL]) commonly used for VEMP testing and make a determination of whether acoustic stimuli levels with VEMP testing are safe for use in children. RESEARCH
designProspective experimental. STUDY SAMPLE: Ten children (4-6 years) and ten young adults (24-35 years) with normal hearing sensitivity and middle ear function participated in the study. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Probe microphone peSPL measurements of clicks and 500 Hz tonebursts (TBs) were recorded in tubes of small, medium, and large diameter, and in a Brüel & Kjær Ear Simulator Type 4157 to assess for linearity of the stimulus at high levels. The different diameter tubes were used to approximate the range of cross-sectional areas in infant, child, and adult ears, respectively. Equivalent ear canal volume and peSPL measurements were then recorded in child and adult ears. Lower intensity levels were used in the participant's ears to limit exposure to high intensity sound. The peSPL measurements in participant ears were extrapolated using predictions from linear mixed models to determine if equivalent ear canal volume significantly contributed to overall peSPL and to estimate the mean and 95% confidence intervals of peSPLs in child and adult ears when high intensity stimulus levels (100 dB nHL) are used for VEMP testing without exposing subjects to high-intensity stimuli.
resultsMeasurements from the coupler and tubes suggested: 1) each stimuli was linear, 2) there were no distortions or nonlinearities at high levels, and 3) peSPL increased with decreased tube diameter. Measurements in participant ears suggested: 1) peSPL was approximately 3 dB larger in child compared to adult ears, and 2) peSPL was larger in response to clicks compared to 500 Hz TBs. The model predicted the following 95% confidence interval for a 100 dB nHL click: 127-136.5 dB peSPL in adult ears and 128.7-138.2 dB peSPL in child ears. The model predicted the following 95% confidence interval for a 100 dB nHL 500 Hz TB stimulus: 122.2-128.2 dB peSPL in adult ears and 124.8-130.8 dB peSPL in child ears.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that 1) when completing VEMP testing, the stimulus is approximately 3 dB higher in a child's ear, 2) a 500 Hz TB is recommended over a click as it has lower peSPL compared to the click, and 3) both duration and intensity should be considered when choosing VEMP stimuli. Calculating the total sound energy exposure for your chosen stimuli is recommended as it accounts for both duration and intensity. When using this calculation for children, consider adding 3 dB to the stimulus level.
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.