Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35985964›Full record

ArticleHearing research2022

Cochlear implant spectral bandwidth for optimizing electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS).

René H Gifford, Linsey W Sunderhaus, Benoit M Dawant, Robert F Labadie, Jack H Noble

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hearing research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07356128 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Binaural Cue Sensitivity in Children and Adults With Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation

TypeobservationalSponsorHearts for HearingRan2025 to 2028Enrolled200ConditionsBilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Cochlear Implant, Hearing Preservation, Electric and Acoustic SimulationArmsbinaural processing over time, binaural processing over time for children and adults with normal hearing
NCT07476079 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Optimization and Validation of Electric Acoustic Stimulation (EAS) Mapping as a Function of Residual Hearing After CI-Implantation

TypeinterventionalSponsorLuzerner KantonsspitalRan2026 to 2027Enrolled12ConditionsFitting Methods by EAS PatientsArmsThe objective fitting method of the EAS based on the thresholds of electrocochleography is the intervention of our study., The subjective adjustment of an EAS based on thresholds from the pure tone audiogram.
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

René H GiffordVanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Hearing and Speech Sciences, Nashville, TN. Electronic address: rene.h.gifford@vanderbilt.edu.
Linsey W SunderhausVanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Hearing and Speech Sciences, Nashville, TN.
Benoit M DawantVanderbilt University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nashville, TN.
Robert F LabadieVanderbilt University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nashville, TN; Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Nashville, TN.
Jack H NobleVanderbilt University, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Nashville, TN.
Vanderbilt University · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · US

Funding

The Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (VICTR)UL1TR000445 · NCATS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI BERNARD, GORDON RAPHAEL · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
Model-based Cochlear Implant ProgrammingR01DC014037 · NIDCD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI NOBLE, JACK · 2014 to 2024
$5.0M
Cochlear Implants: Combined Electric and Binaural Acoustic StimulationR01DC009404 · NIDCD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI GIFFORD, RENE H · 2010 to 2019
$3.4M
Computer-assisted, image-guided programming of Cochlear ImplantsR01DC014462 · NIDCD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI DAWANT, BENOIT M. · 2016 to 2020
$2.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000445NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC009404NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC014037NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC014462
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cochlear implantation with acoustic hearing preservation is becoming increasingly prevalent allowing cochlear implant (CI) users to combine electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS) in the implanted ears. Despite a growing EAS population, our field does not have definitive guidance regarding EAS technology optimization and the majority of previous studies investigating hearing aid (HA) and cochlear implant (CI) programming for EAS listeners have been mixed. Thus, the purpose of this exploratory study was to explore the effects of various EAS crossover frequencies-defined as the low-frequency (LF) CI cutoff-relative to the underlying spiral ganglion (SG) characteristic frequency associated with the most distal or apical electrode in the array. Speech recognition in semi-diffuse noise and subjective estimates of listening difficulty were measured for 15 adult CI recipients with acoustic hearing preservation in three listening conditions: 1) CI-alone, 2) bimodal (CI+HA), and best-aided EAS (CIHA+HA). The results showed no effect of LF CI cutoff for any of the three listening conditions such that there was no trend for increased performance or less subjective listening difficulty across LF CI cutoffs, referenced to underlying SG-place frequency. Consistent with past studies, the current results were also consistent with significant speech recognition and subject listening difficulty benefits for both bimodal (CI+HA) and best-aided EAS (CIHA+HA) as compared to CI-alone listening as well as significant additional benefits for best-aided EAS (CIHA+HA) compared to bimodal hearing (CI+HA). Future studies are necessary to investigate the efficacy of SG-place-based fittings for i) large samples of experienced EAS listeners for whom perceptual adaptation has occurred to the frequency mismatch provided by standard CI frequency allocations, and ii) EAS users at or close to CI activation as place-based approaches may ultimately yield greater outcomes, particularly for newly activated CI users for whom SG-place-based approaches may afford a steeper trajectory to performance asymptote.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsSpeech PerceptionAcousticsAcoustic StimulationElectric Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID35985964
PMCPMC10036878
OpenAlexW4288069885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.