ArticleTrends in hearing
Temporal Pitch Perception in Cochlear-Implant Users: Channel Independence in Apical Cochlear Regions.
Article in Trends in hearing. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Temporal Pitch Perception of Multi-Channel Stimuli by Cochlear-Implant Users.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Article
- Effects of Monaural Temporal Electrode Asynchrony and Channel Interactions in Bilateral and Unilateral Cochlear-Implant Stimulation.Trends in hearingArticle
- 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two-electrode stimuli presented on adjacent mid-array contacts in cochlear-implant users elicit pitch percepts that are not consistent with a summation of the two temporal patterns. This indicates that low-rate temporal rate codes can be applied with considerable independence on adjacent mid-array electrodes. At issue in this study was whether a similar independence of temporal pitch cues can also be observed for more apical sites of stimulation, where temporal cues have been shown to be more reliable than place cues, in contrast to middle and basal sites. In cochlear-implant recipients with single-sided deafness implanted with long lateral-wall electrode arrays, pitch percepts were assessed by matching the pitch of dual-electrode stimuli with pure tones presented to the contralateral normal-hearing ear. The results were supported with an additional pitch-ranking experiment, in a different subject population with bilateral deafness. Unmodulated pulse trains with 100, 200, and 400 pulses per second were presented on three pairs of adjacent electrodes. Pulses were separated by the minimal interchannel delay (1.7 µs) in a short-delay configuration and by half the pulse period in a long-delay configuration. The hypothesis was that subjects would perceive a pitch corresponding to the doubled temporal pattern for the long-delay stimuli due to the summation of excitation patterns from adjacent apical electrodes, if those electrodes were to activate largely overlapping neural populations. However, we found that the mean matched acoustic pitch of the long-delay pulses was not significantly different from that of the short-delay pulses. These findings suggest that also in the apical region in long-array cochlear-implant recipients, temporal cues can be transmitted largely independently on adjacent electrodes.
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.