Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30762601›Full record

ArticleEar and hearing

Auditory Evoked Responses in Older Adults With Normal Hearing, Untreated, and Treated Age-Related Hearing Loss.

Katrina S McClannahan, Kristina C Backer, Kelly L Tremblay

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Auditory and Semantic Processing of Speech-in-Noise in Autism: A Behavioral and EEG Study.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Neural Plasticity Induced by Hearing Aid Use.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katrina S McClannahanDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University, St Louis, Washington, USA.
Kristina C BackerDepartment of Cognitive and Information Sciences, University of California, Merced, California, USA.
Kelly L TremblayDepartment of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Washington, Washington, USA.
University of Washington · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Auditory Neuroscience Traning ProgramT32DC005361 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Adrian KC Lee, DAVID J PERKEL · 2002 to 2026
$8.8M
Electrophysiology and Auditory TrainingF30DC010297 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MCCLANNAHAN, KATRINA · 2010 to 2013
$135k
NIDCD NIH HHS F30 DC010297NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC005361
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe goal of this study was to identify the effects of auditory deprivation (age-related hearing loss) and auditory stimulation (history of hearing aid use) on the neural registration of sound across two stimulus presentation conditions: (1) equal sound pressure level and (2) equal sensation level.

designWe used a between-groups design, involving three groups of 14 older adults (n = 42; 62 to 84 years): (1) clinically defined normal hearing (≤25 dB from 250 to 8000 Hz, bilaterally), (2) bilateral mild-moderate/moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss who have never used hearing aids, and (3) bilateral mild-moderate/moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss who have worn bilateral hearing aids for at least the past 2 years.

resultsThere were significant delays in the auditory P1-N1-P2 complex in older adults with hearing loss compared with their normal hearing peers when using equal sound pressure levels for all participants. However, when the degree and configuration of hearing loss were accounted for through the presentation of equal sensation level stimuli, no latency delays were observed. These results suggest that stimulus audibility modulates P1-N1-P2 morphology and should be controlled for when defining deprivation and stimulus-related neuroplasticity in people with hearing loss. Moreover, a history of auditory stimulation, in the form of hearing aid use, does not appreciably alter the neural registration of unaided auditory evoked brain activity when quantified by the P1-N1-P2.

conclusionsWhen comparing auditory cortical responses in older adults with and without hearing loss, stimulus audibility, and not hearing loss-related neurophysiological changes, results in delayed response latency for those with age-related hearing loss. Future studies should carefully consider stimulus presentation levels when drawing conclusions about deprivation- and stimulation-related neuroplasticity. Additionally, auditory stimulation, in the form of a history of hearing aid use, does not significantly affect the neural registration of sound when quantified using the P1-N1-P2-evoked response.

Indexed as

Evoked Potentials, AuditoryAcoustic StimulationAgedAged, 80 and overAuditory CortexCase-Control StudiesFemaleHearing AidsHearing Loss, SensorineuralHumansMaleMiddle AgedPresbycusisReaction TimeSeverity of Illness Index

Identifiers

PMID30762601
PMCPMC6689468
OpenAlexW2916853969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.