Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33492562›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2021

Using Interleaved Stimulation to Measure the Size and Selectivity of the Sustained Phase-Locked Neural Response to Cochlear Implant Stimulation.

Robert P Carlyon, François Guérit, John M Deeks, Andrew Harland, Robin Gransier, Jan Wouters, Simone R de Rijk, Manohar Bance

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Electrophysiological and Psychophysical Measures of Temporal Pitch Sensitivity in Normal-hearing Listeners.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Cochlear Implant Research and Development in the Twenty-first Century: A Critical Update.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2021
    Review
  6. 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

8 authors.

Robert P CarlyonCambridge Hearing Group, MRC Cognition & Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Rd, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, England. bob.carlyon@mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-6166-501X
François GuéritCambridge Hearing Group, MRC Cognition & Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Rd, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, England.
John M DeeksCambridge Hearing Group, MRC Cognition & Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Rd, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, England.
Andrew HarlandCambridge Hearing Group, MRC Cognition & Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, 15 Chaucer Rd, Cambridge, CB2 7EF, England.
Robin GransierDept. of Neurosciences, ExpORL, KU Leuven, Herestraat 49 box 721, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan WoutersDept. of Neurosciences, ExpORL, KU Leuven, Herestraat 49 box 721, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Simone R de RijkCambridge Hearing Group, Dept. Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England.
Manohar BanceCambridge Hearing Group, Dept. Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, England.

Funding

Medical Research Council G101400Medical Research Council MC_PC_16040Medical Research Council MC_UU_00005/3Wellcome Trust 209243/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We measured the sustained neural response to electrical stimulation by a cochlear implant (CI). To do so, we interleaved two stimuli with frequencies F1 and F2 Hz and recorded a neural distortion response (NDR) at F2-F1 Hz. We show that, because any one time point contains only the F1 or F2 stimulus, the instantaneous nonlinearities typical of electrical artefact should not produce distortion at this frequency. However, if the stimulus is smoothed, such as by charge integration at the nerve membrane, subsequent (neural) nonlinearities can produce a component at F2-F1 Hz. We stimulated a single CI electrode with interleaved sinusoids or interleaved amplitude-modulated pulse trains such that F2 = 1.5F1, and found no evidence for an NDR when F2-F1 was between 90 and 120 Hz. However, interleaved amplitude-modulated pulse trains with F2-F1~40 Hz revealed a substantial NDR with a group delay of about 45 ms, consistent with a thalamic and/or cortical response. The NDR could be measured even from recording electrodes adjacent to the implant and at the highest pulse rates (> 4000 pps) used clinically. We then measured the selectivity of this sustained response by presenting F1 and F2 to different electrodes and at different between-electrode distances. This revealed a broad tuning that, we argue, reflects the overlap between the excitation elicited by the two electrodes. Our results also provide a glimpse of the neural nonlinearity in the auditory system, unaffected by the biomechanical cochlear nonlinearities that accompany acoustic stimulation. Several potential clinical applications of our findings are discussed.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsElectric StimulationAcoustic StimulationCochleaHumanscochlear implantscortical responseelectrophysiologyneural nonlinearitypsychophysics

Identifiers

PMID33492562
PMCPMC7943679

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.