ArticleEar and hearing
The Influence of Sensation Level on Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses.
Article in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Frequency-Following Responses in Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2024Pooled it
- The Influence of Male- and Female-Spoken Vowel Acoustics on Envelope-Following Responses.Seminars in hearing · 2022Review
- Article
- Predicting Hearing aid Benefit Using Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses in Children With Hearing Loss.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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate sensation level (SL)-dependent characteristics of envelope following responses (EFRs) elicited by band-limited speech dominant in low, mid, and high frequencies.
designIn 21 young normal hearing adults, EFRs were elicited by 8 male-spoken speech stimuli-the first formant, and second and higher formants of /u/, /a/ and /i/, and modulated fricatives, /∫/ and /s/. Stimulus SL was computed from behaviorally measured thresholds.
resultsAt 30 dB SL, the amplitude and phase coherence of fricative-elicited EFRs were ~1.5 to 2 times higher than all vowel-elicited EFRs, whereas fewer and smaller differences were found among vowel-elicited EFRs. For all stimuli, EFR amplitude and phase coherence increased by roughly 50% for every 10 dB increase in SL between ~0 and 50 dB.
conclusionsStimulus and frequency dependency in EFRs exist despite accounting for differences in audibility of speech sounds. The growth rate of EFR characteristics with SL is independent of stimulus and its frequency.
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.