Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35989907›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022

Simultaneous subcortical and cortical electrophysiological recordings of spectro-temporal processing in humans.

Axelle Calcus, Jaime A Undurraga, Deborah Vickers

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 5 countries.

Axelle CalcusDepartment of Speech, Hearing and Phonetic Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Jaime A UndurragaDepartment of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Deborah VickersDepartment of Speech, Hearing and Phonetic Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
École Normale Supérieure - PSL · FRInteracoustics (Denmark) · DKUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S002537/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective assessment of auditory discrimination has often been measured using the Auditory Change Complex (ACC), which is a cortically generated potential elicited by a change occurring within an ongoing, long-duration auditory stimulus. In cochlear implant users, the electrically-evoked ACC has been used to measure electrode discrimination by changing the stimulating electrode during stimulus presentation. In addition to this cortical component, subcortical measures provide further information about early auditory processing in both normal hearing listeners and cochlear implant users. In particular, the frequency-following response (FFR) is thought to reflect the auditory encoding at the level of the brainstem. Interestingly, recent research suggests that it is possible to simultaneously measure both subcortical and cortical physiological activity. The aim of this research was twofold: first, to understand the scope for simultaneously recording both the FFR (subcortical) and ACC (cortical) responses in normal hearing adults. Second, to determine the best recording parameters for optimizing the simultaneous capture of both responses with clinical applications in mind. Electrophysiological responses were recorded in 10 normally-hearing adults while they listened to 16-second-long pure tone sequences. The carrier frequency of these sequences was either steady or alternating periodically throughout the sequence, generating an ACC response to each alternation-the alternating ACC paradigm. In the "alternating" sequences, both the alternating rate and the carrier frequency varied parametrically. We investigated three alternating rates (1, 2.5, and 6.5 Hz) and seven frequency pairs covering the low-, mid-, and high-frequency range, including narrow and wide frequency separations. Our results indicate that both the slowest (1 Hz) and medium (2.5 Hz) alternation rates led to significant FFR and ACC responses in most frequency ranges tested. Low carrier frequencies led to larger FFR amplitudes, larger P1 amplitudes, and N1-P2 amplitude difference at slow alternation rates. No significant relationship was found between subcortical and cortical response amplitudes, in line with different generators and processing levels across the auditory pathway. Overall, the alternating ACC paradigm can be used to measure sub-cortical and cortical responses as indicators of auditory early neural encoding (FFR) and sound discrimination (ACC) in the pathway, and these are best obtained at slow alternation rates (1 Hz) in the low-frequency range (300-1200 Hz).

Indexed as

auditory change complexauditory processing (AP)brainstemcortical auditory evoked potential (CAEP)frequency following response (FFR)

Identifiers

PMID35989907
PMCPMC9381701
OpenAlexW4289517057

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.