ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2020
Neural Mechanisms of Hearing Recovery for Cochlear-Implanted Patients: An Electroencephalogram Follow-Up Study.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for migraine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Acta neurologica Belgica · 2024Pooled it
- Fucoidan induces ferroptosis in colorectal cancer cells by regulating the SLC7A11/GPX4 signaling pathway and modulating metabolic pathways.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Deciphering the relevance of dead box RNA helicases in gliomagenesis and autophagy.Human cell · 2025Review
- Applications and Challenges of Auditory Brain-Computer Interfaces in Objective Auditory Assessments for Pediatric Cochlear Implants.Exploration (Beijing, China) · 2025Review
- A maturational frequency discrimination deficit may explain developmental language disorder.Psychological review · 2024Article
- Music in noise recognition: An EEG study of listening effort in cochlear implant users and normal hearing controls.PloS one · 2023Article
- Targeting specificity protein 1 with miR-128-3p overcomes TGF-β1 mediated epithelial-mesenchymal transition in breast cancer: An in vitro study.Molecular biology reports · 2022Article
- Children's Neural Sensitivity to Prosodic Features of Natural Speech and Its Significance to Speech Development in Cochlear Implanted Children.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Research Status and Future Development of Cochlear Reimplantation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with severe profound hearing loss could benefit from cochlear implantation (CI). However, the neural mechanism of such benefit is still unclear. Therefore, we analyzed the electroencephalogram (EEG) and behavioral indicators of auditory function remodeling in patients with CI. Both indicators were sampled at multiple time points after implantation (1, 90, and 180 days).
methodsFirst, the speech perception ability was evaluated with the recording of a list of Chinese words and sentences in 15 healthy controls (HC group) and 10 patients with CI (CI group). EEG data were collected using an oddball paradigm. Then, the characteristics of event-related potentials (ERPs) and mismatch negative (MMN) were compared between the CI group and the HC group. In addition, we analyzed the phase lag indices (PLI) in the CI group and the HC group and calculated the difference in functional connectivity between the two groups at different stages after implantation.
resultsThe behavioral indicator, speech recognition ability, in CI patients improved as the implantation time increased. The MMN analysis showed that CI patients could recognize the difference between standard and deviation stimuli just like the HCs 90 days after cochlear implantation. Comparing the latencies of N1/P2/MMN between the CI group and the HC group, we found that the latency of N1/P2 in CI patients was longer, while the latency of MMN in CI users was shorter. In addition, PLI-based whole-brain functional connectivity (PLI-FC) showed that the difference between the CI group and the HC group mainly exists in electrode pairs between the bilateral auditory area and the frontal area. Furthermore, all those differences gradually decreased with the increase in implantation time.
conclusionThe N1 amplitude, N1/P2/MMN latency, and PLI-FC in the alpha band may reflect the process of auditory function remodeling and could be an objective index for the assessment of speech perception ability and the effect of cochlear implantation.
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.