Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36273017›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Evidence of visual crossmodal reorganization positively relates to speech outcomes in cochlear implant users.

Brandon T Paul, Münir Demir Bajin, Mila Uzelac, Joseph Chen, Trung Le, Vincent Lin, Andrew Dimitrijevic

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Longitudinal adaptations in neural and behavioral systems following hearing restoration using cochlear implants.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Brandon T Paul *Department of Psychology, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, M5B 2K3, Canada. btpaul@ryerson.ca.
Münir Demir Bajin *Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Mila UzelacEvaluative Clinical Sciences Platform, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Joseph ChenOtolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Trung LeOtolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Vincent LinOtolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Andrew DimitrijevicOtolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada. andrew.dimitrijevic@sunnybrook.ca.
Sunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAHealth Sciences Centre · CAToronto Metropolitan University · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deaf individuals who use a cochlear implant (CI) have remarkably different outcomes for auditory speech communication ability. One factor assumed to affect CI outcomes is visual crossmodal plasticity in auditory cortex, where deprived auditory regions begin to support non-auditory functions such as vision. Previous research has viewed crossmodal plasticity as harmful for speech outcomes for CI users if it interferes with sound processing, while others have demonstrated that plasticity related to visual language may be beneficial for speech recovery. To clarify, we used electroencephalography (EEG) to measure brain responses to a partial face speaking a silent single-syllable word (visual language) in 15 CI users and 13 age-matched typical-hearing controls. We used source analysis on EEG activity to measure crossmodal visual responses in auditory cortex and then compared them to CI users' speech-in-noise listening ability. CI users' brain response to the onset of the video stimulus (face) was larger than controls in left auditory cortex, consistent with crossmodal activation after deafness. CI users also produced a mixture of alpha (8-12 Hz) synchronization and desynchronization in auditory cortex while watching lip movement while controls instead showed desynchronization. CI users with higher speech scores had stronger crossmodal responses in auditory cortex to the onset of the video, but those with lower speech scores had increases in alpha power during lip movement in auditory areas. Therefore, evidence of crossmodal reorganization in CI users does not necessarily predict poor speech outcomes, and differences in crossmodal activation during lip reading may instead relate to strategies or differences that CI users use in audiovisual speech communication.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsDeafnessSpeech PerceptionHumansSpeech

Identifiers

PMID36273017
PMCPMC9587996
OpenAlexW4307139572

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.