ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021
Neural Measures of Pitch Processing in EEG Responses to Running Speech.
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 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Very Early Cortical Auditory Responses to Speech in Humans.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Acoustic Features of Emotional Vocalizations Account for Early Modulations of Event-Related Brain Potentials.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
- Neural speech tracking in a virtual acoustic environment: audio-visual benefit for unscripted continuous speech.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Comparing methods for deriving the auditory brainstem response to continuous speech in human listeners.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Neural encoding of linguistic speech cues is unaffected by cognitive decline, but decreases with increasing hearing impairment.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Auditory Encoding of Natural Speech at Subcortical and Cortical Levels Is Not Indicative of Cognitive Decline.eNeuro · 2024Article
- Subcortical responses to music and speech are alike while cortical responses diverge.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Cortical representation of speech temporal information through high gamma-band activity and its temporal modulation.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2023Article
- The neural response at the fundamental frequency of speech is modulated by word-level acoustic and linguistic information.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Linearized encoding models are increasingly employed to model cortical responses to running speech. Recent extensions to subcortical responses suggest clinical perspectives, potentially complementing auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) or frequency-following responses (FFRs) that are current clinical standards. However, while it is well-known that the auditory brainstem responds both to transient amplitude variations and the stimulus periodicity that gives rise to pitch, these features co-vary in running speech. Here, we discuss challenges in disentangling the features that drive the subcortical response to running speech. Cortical and subcortical electroencephalographic (EEG) responses to running speech from 19 normal-hearing listeners (12 female) were analyzed. Using forward regression models, we confirm that responses to the rectified broadband speech signal yield temporal response functions consistent with wave V of the ABR, as shown in previous work. Peak latency and amplitude of the speech-evoked brainstem response were correlated with standard click-evoked ABRs recorded at the vertex electrode (Cz). Similar responses could be obtained using the fundamental frequency (F0) of the speech signal as model predictor. However, simulations indicated that dissociating responses to temporal fine structure at the F0 from broadband amplitude variations is not possible given the high co-variance of the features and the poor signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of subcortical EEG responses. In cortex, both simulations and data replicated previous findings indicating that envelope tracking on frontal electrodes can be dissociated from responses to slow variations in F0 (relative pitch). Yet, no association between subcortical F0-tracking and cortical responses to relative pitch could be detected. These results indicate that while subcortical speech responses are comparable to click-evoked ABRs, dissociating pitch-related processing in the auditory brainstem may be challenging with natural speech stimuli.
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.