ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2022
Model-based prediction of optogenetic sound encoding in the human cochlea by future optical cochlear implants.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- From optical control to translational readiness: an evidence-tiered framework for optogenetics in neuromuscular and neurological disorders.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- Exploring the 3D architecture of brain tissue using digital holographic microscopy.Biomedical optics express · 2026Article
- Fraxicon for Optical Applications with Aperture ∼1 mm: Characterisation Study.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review
- Channelrhodopsin fluorescent tag replacement for clinical translation of optogenetic hearing restoration.Molecular therapy. Methods & clinical development · 2023Article
- Patient perspectives on the need for improved hearing rehabilitation: A qualitative survey study of German cochlear implant users.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When hearing fails, electrical cochlear implants (eCIs) partially restore hearing by direct stimulation of spiral ganglion neurons (SGNs). As light can be better confined in space than electrical current, optical CIs (oCIs) provide more spectral information promising a fundamental improvement of hearing restoration by cochlear implants. Here, we turned to computer modelling for predicting the outcome of optogenetic hearing restoration by future oCIs in humans. We combined three-dimensional reconstruction of the human cochlea with ray-tracing simulation of emission from LED or laser-coupled waveguide emitters of the oCI. Irradiance was read out at the somata of SGNs. The irradiance values reached with waveguides were about 14 times higher than with LEDs, at the same radiant flux of the emitter. Moreover, waveguides outperformed LEDs regarding spectral selectivity. oCIs with either emitter type showed greater spectral selectivity when compared to eCI. In addition, modeling the effects of the source-to-SGN distance, orientation of the sources and impact of scar tissue further informs the development of optogenetic hearing restoration.
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.