Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30949879›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2019

Evaluating Psychophysical Polarity Sensitivity as an Indirect Estimate of Neural Status in Cochlear Implant Listeners.

Kelly N Jahn, Julie G Arenberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Editorial: Views on JARO 2023.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Cochlear Health and Cochlear-implant Function.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Assessing the Relationship Between Pitch Perception and Neural Health in Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Cochlear Implant Research and Development in the Twenty-first Century: A Critical Update.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2021
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Kelly N JahnDepartment of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of Washington, 1417 NE 42nd St., Seattle, WA, 98105, USA. jahnk@uw.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5832-5137
Julie G ArenbergMassachusetts Eye and Ear, 243 Charles St., Boston, MA, 02114, USA.

Funding

Auditory Neuroscience Traning ProgramT32DC005361 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Adrian KC Lee, DAVID J PERKEL · 2002 to 2026
$8.8M
Perceptual implications of cochlear implant electrode-neuron interfacesR01DC012142 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI JULIE G Arenberg · 2012 to 2026
$6.5M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC012142NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC005361NIH HHS T32 DC005361
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The physiological integrity of spiral ganglion neurons is presumed to influence cochlear implant (CI) outcomes, but it is difficult to measure neural health in CI listeners. Modeling data suggest that, when peripheral processes have degenerated, anodic stimulation may be a more effective neural stimulus than cathodic stimulation. The primary goal of the present study was to evaluate the emerging theory that polarity sensitivity reflects neural health in CI listeners. An ideal in vivo estimate of neural integrity should vary independently of other factors known to influence the CI electrode-neuron interface, such as electrode position and tissue impedances. Thus, the present analyses quantified the relationships between polarity sensitivity and (1) electrode position estimated via computed tomography imaging, (2) intracochlear resistance estimated via electrical field imaging, and (3) focused (steered quadrupolar) behavioral thresholds, which are believed to reflect a combination of local neural health, electrode position, and intracochlear resistance. Eleven adults with Advanced Bionics devices participated. To estimate polarity sensitivity, electrode-specific behavioral thresholds in response to monopolar, triphasic pulses where the central high-amplitude phase was either anodic (CAC) or cathodic (ACA) were measured. The polarity effect was defined as the difference in threshold response to the ACA compared to the CAC stimulus. Results indicated that the polarity effect was not related to electrode-to-modiolus distance, electrode scalar location, or intracochlear resistance. Large, positive polarity effects, which may indicate SGN degeneration, were associated with relatively high focused behavioral thresholds. The polarity effect explained a significant portion of the variation in focused thresholds, even after controlling for electrode position and intracochlear resistance. Overall, these results provide support for the theory that the polarity effect may reflect neural integrity in CI listeners. Evidence from this study supports further investigation into the use of polarity sensitivity for optimizing individual CI programming parameters.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAuditory ThresholdCochleaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Agedelectrical field imagingelectrode-neuron interfaceelectrode positionimagingpolarity effectpsychophysics

Identifiers

PMID30949879
PMCPMC6646612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.