ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021
eABR THR Estimation Using High-Rate Multi-Pulse Stimulation in Cochlear Implant Users.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficient and sustained optogenetic control of sensory and cardiac systems.Nature biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Review
- Electrically evoked mismatch negativity responses to loudness and pitch cues in cochlear implant users.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Comparison of response properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve reported in human listeners and in animal models.Hearing research · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We estimated the electrically-evoked auditory brainstem response thresholds (eABR THRs) in response to multi-pulses with high burst rate of 10,000 pulses-per-second (pps). Growth functions of wave eV amplitudes, root mean square (RMS) values, peak of phase-locking value (PLV), and the lowest valid data point (LVDP) were calculated in 1-, 2-, 4-, 8-, and 16-pulses conditions. The growth functions were then fitted and extrapolated with linear and exponential functions to find eABR THRs. The estimated THRs were compared to psychophysical THRs determined for multi-pulse conditions as well as to the clinical THRs measured behaviorally at the rate of 1,000 pps. The growth functions of features showed shallower growth slopes when the number of pulses increased. eABR THRs estimated in 4-, 8-, and 16-pulses conditions were closer to the clinical THRs, when compared to 1- and 2-pulses conditions. However, the smallest difference between estimated eABR THRs and clinical THRs was not always achieved from the same number of pulses. The smallest absolute difference of 30.3 μA was found for the linear fittings on growth functions of eABR RMS values in 4-pulses condition. Pearson's correlation coefficients (PCCs) between eABR THRs and psychophysical THRs were significant and relatively large in all but 16-pulses conditions. The PCCs between eABR THRs and clinical THRs, however, were smaller and in less cases significant. Results of this study showed that eABRs to multi-pulse stimulation could, to some extent, represent clinical stimulation paradigms, and thus in comparison to single pulses, could estimate clinical THRs with smaller errors.
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.