ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2020
Influence of bilateral cochlear implants on vocal control.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Research status and progress of bilateral cochlear implantation].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2024Review
- Impact of cochlear implants use on voice production and quality.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Using unilateral stimulation to create a reference for bilateral fusion judgments.JASA express letters · 2021Article
- Adaptation to pitch-altered feedback is independent of one's own voice pitch sensitivity.Scientific reports · 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Receiving a cochlear implant (CI) can improve fundamental frequency (F0) control for deaf individuals, resulting in increased vocal pitch control. However, it is unclear whether using bilateral CIs, which often result in mismatched pitch perception between ears, will counter this benefit. To investigate this, 23 bilateral CI users were asked to produce a sustained vocalization using one CI, the other CI, both CIs, or neither. Additionally, a set of eight normal hearing participants completed the sustained vocalization task as a control group. The results indicated that F0 control is worse with both CIs compared to using the ear that yields the lowest vocal variability. The results also indicated that there was a large range of F0 variability even for the relatively stable portion of the vocalization, spanning from 6 to 46 cents. These results suggest that bilateral CIs can detrimentally affect vocal control.
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.