ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2018
Interaural Time Difference Perception with a Cochlear Implant and a Normal Ear.
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 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spatial hearing adaptation in congenital and acquired single-sided deafness.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Incomplete binaural restoration in single-sided deafness treated with cochlear implants: insights from compensatory head-orienting behaviors.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Auditory Spatial Discrimination and Sound Localization in Single-Sided Deaf Participants Provided with a Cochlear Implant.Audiology & neuro-otology · 2024Article
- Review
- Longitudinal auditory data of children with prelingual single-sided deafness managed with early cochlear implantation.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Frequency Fitting Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithm in Cochlear Implant Users with Bimodal Binaural Hearing.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Interaural Place-of-Stimulation Mismatch Estimates Using CT Scans and Binaural Perception, But Not Pitch, Are Consistent in Cochlear-Implant Users.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- Sensitivity to binaural temporal-envelope beats with single-sided deafness and a cochlear implant as a measure of tonotopic match (L).The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2020Article
- Hearing with One Ear: Consequences and Treatments for Profound Unilateral Hearing Loss.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Counting or discriminating the number of voices to assess binaural fusion with single-sided vocoders.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2020Article
- Development of cortical auditory responses to speech in noise in unilaterally deaf adults following cochlear implantation.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
- A Comparison of Place-Pitch-Based Interaural Electrode Matching Methods for Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Users.Trends in hearingArticle
- Article
- Considerations for Fitting Cochlear Implants Bimodally and to the Single-Sided Deaf.Trends in hearingReview
- Spatial Speech-in-Noise Performance in Bimodal and Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users.Trends in hearingArticle
- Reducing the Device Delay Mismatch Can Improve Sound Localization in Bimodal Cochlear Implant/Hearing-Aid Users.Trends in hearingArticle
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Currently there is a growing population of cochlear-implant (CI) users with (near) normal hearing in the non-implanted ear. This configuration is often called SSD (single-sided deafness) CI. The goal of the CI is often to improve spatial perception, so the question raises to what extent SSD CI listeners are sensitive to interaural time differences (ITDs). In a controlled lab setup, sensitivity to ITDs was investigated in 11 SSD CI listeners. The stimuli were 100-pps pulse trains on the CI side and band-limited click trains on the acoustic side. After determining level balance and the delay needed to achieve synchronous stimulation of the two ears, the just noticeable difference in ITD was measured using an adaptive procedure. Seven out of 11 listeners were sensitive to ITDs, with a median just noticeable difference of 438 μs. Out of the four listeners who were not sensitive to ITD, one listener reported binaural fusion, and three listeners reported no binaural fusion. To enable ITD sensitivity, a frequency-dependent delay of the electrical stimulus was required to synchronize the electric and acoustic signals at the level of the auditory nerve. Using subjective fusion measures and refined by ITD sensitivity, it was possible to match a CI electrode to an acoustic frequency range. This shows the feasibility of these measures for the allocation of acoustic frequency ranges to electrodes when fitting a CI to a subject with (near) normal hearing in the contralateral ear.
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.