ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2018
Synchronized Spontaneous Otoacoustic Emissions Provide a Signal-to-Noise Ratio Advantage in Medial-Olivocochlear Reflex Assays.
Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fluctuations of Otoacoustic Emissions and Medial Olivocochlear Reflexes: Tracking One Subject over a Year.Audiology research · 2022Article
- The Reliability of Contralateral Suppression of Otoacoustic Emissions Is Greater in Women than in Men.Audiology research · 2022Article
- 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
- A Time-Course-Based Estimation of the Human Medial Olivocochlear Reflex Function Using Clicks.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- No Change in Medial Olivocochlear Efferent Activity during an Auditory or Visual Task: Dual Evidence from Otoacoustic Emissions and Event-Related Potentials.Brain sciences · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Detection of medial olivocochlear-induced (MOC) changes to transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) requires high signal-to-noise ratios (SNR). TEOAEs associated with synchronized spontaneous (SS) OAEs exhibit higher SNRs than TEOAEs in the absence of SSOAEs, potentially making the former well suited for MOC assays. Although SSOAEs may complicate interpretation of MOC-induced changes to TEOAE latency, recent work suggests SSOAEs are not a problem in non-latency-dependent MOC assays. The current work examined the potential benefit of SSOAEs in TEOAE-based assays of the MOC efferents. It was hypothesized that the higher SNR afforded by SSOAEs would permit detection of smaller changes to the TEOAE upon activation of the MOC reflex. TEOAEs were measured in 24 female subjects in the presence and absence of contralateral broadband noise. Frequency bands with and without SSOAEs were identified for each subject. The prevalence of TEOAEs and statistically significant MOC effects were highest in frequency bands that also contained SSOAEs. The median TEOAE SNR in frequency bands with SSOAEs was approximately 8 dB higher than the SNR in frequency bands lacking SSOAEs. After normalizing by TEOAE amplitude, MOC-induced changes to the TEOAE were similar between frequency bands with and without SSOAEs. Smaller MOC effects were detectable across a subset of the frequency bands with SSOAEs, presumably due to a higher TEOAE SNR. These findings demonstrate that SSOAEs are advantageous in assays of the MOC reflex.
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.