ArticleHearing research2018
Deactivating cochlear implant electrodes to improve speech perception: A computational approach.
Article in Hearing research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
A potential bottleneck to improving speech perception performance in cochlear implant (CI) users is that some of their electrodes may poorly encode speech information. Several studies have examined the effect of deactivating poorly encoding electrodes on speech perception with mixed results. Many of these studies focused on identifying poorly encoding electrodes by some measure (e.g. electrode discrimination, pitch ordering, threshold, CT-guided, masked modulation detection), but provide inconsistent criteria about which electrodes, and how many, should be deactivated, and without considering how speech information becomes distributed across the electrode array. The present simulation study addresses this issue using computational approaches. Previously validated models were used to generate predictions of speech scores as a function of all possible combinations of active electrodes in a 22-electrode array in three groups of hypothetical subjects representative of relatively better, moderate, and poorer performing CI users. Using high-performance computing, over 500 million predictions were generated. Although deactivation of the poorest encoding electrodes sometimes resulted in predicted benefit, this benefit was significantly less relative to predictions resulting from model-optimized deactivations. This trend persisted when using novel stimuli (i.e. other than those used for optimization) and when using different processing strategies. Optimum electrode deactivation patterns produced an average predicted increase in word scores of 10% with some scores increasing by more than 20%. Optimum electrode deactivation patterns typically included 11 to 19 (out of 22) active electrodes, depending on the performance group. Optimal active electrode combinations were those that maximized discrimination of speech cues, maintaining 80%-100% of the physical span of the array. The present study demonstrates the potential for further improving CI users' speech scores with appropriate selection of active electrodes.
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.