ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2020
Event-Related Potentials to Changes in Sound Intensity Demonstrate Alterations in Brain Function Related to Depression and Aging.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- N170 Amplitude to Rare Neutral Faces in an Oddball Condition Reflects Prediction Error.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- Aging Impacts Basic Auditory and Timing Processes.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- What Do Mismatch Negativity (MMN) Responses Tell Us About Tinnitus?Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Review
- Article
- The Mediating Effects of Coping Style on the Effects of Breath Count Mindfulness Training on Depressive Symptoms among International Students in China.Neural plasticity · 2020Article
- Interaction of Background Noise and Auditory Hallucinations on Phonemic Mismatch Negativity (MMN) and P3a Processing in Schizophrenia.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measures of the brain's automatic electrophysiological responses to sounds represent a potential tool for identifying age- and depression-related neural markers. However, these markers have rarely been studied related to aging and depression within one study. Here, we investigated auditory event-related potentials (ERPs) in the brain that may show different alterations related to aging and depression. We used an oddball condition employing changes in sound intensity to investigate: (i) sound intensity dependence; (ii) sensory gating; and (iii) change detection, all within a single paradigm. The ERPs of younger (18-40 years) and older (62-80 years) depressed female participants and age-matched non-depressed participants were measured. Intensity dependence was examined as the difference between N1 responses to repeated high- and low-intensity sounds, sensory gating as N1 responses to rare and repeated sounds, and change detection as indexed by the mismatch negativity (MMN). We found that intensity dependence was greater in older participants than younger ones, indicating effects related to aging but not to depression. For sensory gating, we found depression- and age-related alterations as increased N1 responses. No group differences were found for MMN. Although a sensory gating deficit was expected in older adults, this study is the first to demonstrate age-related overexcitability in sound intensity dependency. The results indicate that automatic brain responses to sound intensity changes are suitable for studying age- and depression-related neural markers but may not be sensitive enough to differentiate the effects of aging and depression.
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.