ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2020
Relationship Between Behavioral and Stimulus Frequency Otoacoustic Emissions Delay-Based Tuning Estimates.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- On the Sharpness of Auditory Filters: Considering Subclinical Deficits Reveals Sharper Otoacoustic Emission Estimates of Frequency Selectivity in Humans.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Article
- Cochlear tuning estimates from level ratio functions of distortion product otoacoustic emissions.International journal of audiology · 2021Article
- Cochlear Tuning in Early Aging Estimated with Three Methods.Trends in hearingArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose The phase delay of stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) has been proposed as a noninvasive, objective, and fast source for estimating cochlear mechanical tuning. However, the implementation of SFOAEs clinically has been thwarted by the gaps in understanding of the stability of SFOAE delay-based tuning estimates and their relationship to behavioral measures of tuning. Therefore, the goals of this study were (a) to investigate the relationship between delay-based tuning estimates from SFOAEs and simultaneously masked psychophysical tuning curves (PTCs) and (b) to assess the across- and within-session repeatability of tuning estimates from behavioral and OAE measures. Method Three sets of behavioral and OAE measurements were collected in 24 normal-hearing, young adults for two probe frequencies, 1 and 4 kHz. For each participant, delay-based tuning estimates were derived from the phase gradient of SFOAEs. SFOAE-based and behavioral estimates of tuning obtained using the fast-swept PTC paradigm were compared within and across sessions. Results In general, tuning estimates were sharper at 4 kHz compared to 1 kHz for both PTCs and SFOAEs. Statistical analyses revealed a significant correlation between SFOAE delay-based tuning and PTCs at 4 kHz, but not 1 kHz. Lastly, SFOAE delay-based tuning estimates showed better intra- and intersession repeatability compared to PTCs. Conclusions SFOAE phase-gradient delays reflect aspects of cochlear mechanical tuning, in that a frequency dependence similar to that of basilar membrane tuning was observed. Furthermore, the significant correlation with PTCs at 4 kHz and the high repeatability of SFOAE-based tuning measures offer promise of an objective, nonbehavioral assay of tuning in human ears.
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.