Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29495731›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2018

Comparison of time-frequency methods for analyzing stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions.

Milan Biswal, Srikanta K Mishra

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Optimal Scale-Invariant Wavelet Representation and Filtering of Human Otoacoustic Emissions.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2024
    Review
  3. Article
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.

Milan BiswalDepartment of Communication Disorders, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003, USA.
Srikanta K MishraDepartment of Communication Disorders, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003, USA.

Funding

Medial Olivocochlear Reflex in ChildrenR03DC014573 · NIDCD · NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY LAS CRUCES · PI MISHRA, SRIKANTA · 2016 to 2018
$461k
NIDCD NIH HHS R03 DC014573
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) can have multiple time varying components, including multiple internal reflections. It is, therefore, necessary to study SFOAEs using techniques that can represent their time-frequency behavior. Although various time-frequency schemes can be applied to identify and filter SFOAE components, their accuracy for SFOAE analysis has not been investigated. The relative performance of these methods is important for accurate characterization of SFOAEs that may, in turn, enhance the understanding of SFOAE generation. This study using in silico experiments examined the performance of three linear (short-time Fourier transform, continuous wavelet transform, Stockwell transform) and two nonlinear (empirical mode decomposition and synchrosqueezed wavelet transform) time-frequency approaches for SFOAE analysis. Their performances in terms of phase-gradient delay estimation, frequency specificity, and spectral component extraction are compared, and the relative merits and limitations of each method are discussed. Overall, this paper provides a comparative analysis of various time-frequency methods useful for otoacoustic emission applications.

Indexed as

AcousticsModels, TheoreticalOtoacoustic Emissions, SpontaneousSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedAcoustic StimulationAnimalsComputer SimulationFourier AnalysisHumansNonlinear DynamicsSound SpectrographyTime FactorsWavelet Analysis

Identifiers

PMID29495731
PMCPMC5796829

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.