ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2018
Modulation detection interference in cochlear implant listeners under forward masking conditions.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Forward entrainment: Psychophysics, neural correlates, and function.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Review
- Pleasantness Ratings for Harmonic Intervals With Acoustic and Electric Hearing in Unilaterally Deaf Cochlear Implant Patients.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
- Factors Affecting Bimodal Benefit in Pediatric Mandarin-Speaking Chinese Cochlear Implant Users.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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Little is known about cochlear implant (CI) users' ability to process amplitude modulation (AM) under conditions of forward masking (forward-modulation detection/discrimination interference, or F-MDI). In this study, F-MDI was investigated in adult CI listeners using direct electrical stimulation via research interface. The target was sinusoidally amplitude modulated at 50 Hz, and presented to a fixed electrode in the middle of the array. The forward masker was either amplitude modulated at the same rate (AM) or unmodulated and presented at the peak amplitude of its AM counterpart (steady-state peak, SSP). Results showed that the AM masker produced higher modulation thresholds in the target than the SSP masker. The difference (F-MDI) was estimated to be 4.6 dB on average, and did not change with masker-target delays up to 100 ms or with masker-target spatial electrode distances up to eight electrodes. Results with a coherent remote cue presented with the masker showed that confusion effects did not play a role in the observed F-MDI. Traditional recovery from forward masking using the same maskers and a 20-ms probe, measured in four of the subjects, confirmed the expected result: higher thresholds with the SSP masker than the AM masker. Collectively, the results indicate that significant F-MDI occurs in CI users.
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.