Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36541959›Full record

ArticleCoDAS2022

Masking release in cortical auditory evoked potentials with speech stimulus.

Mônyka Ferreira Borges Rocha, Denise Costa Menezes, Danielle Samara Bandeira Duarte, Silvana Maria Sobral Griz, Ana Claudia Figueiredo Frizzo, Pedro de Lemos Menezes, Cleide Fernandes Teixeira, Karina Paes Advíncula

Open access · diamondFull text read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in CoDAS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mônyka Ferreira Borges RochaPrograma de Pós-graduação em Saúde da Comunicação Humana, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE - Recife (PE), Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4355-8413
Denise Costa MenezesPrograma de Pós-graduação em Saúde da Comunicação Humana, Departamento de Fonoaudiologia, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE - Recife (PE), Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2008-4091
Danielle Samara Bandeira DuarteDepartamento de Fonoaudiologia, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE - Recife (PE), Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6816-2175
Silvana Maria Sobral GrizPrograma de Pós-graduação em Saúde da Comunicação Humana, Departamento de Fonoaudiologia, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE - Recife (PE), Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6759-5964
Ana Claudia Figueiredo FrizzoPrograma de Pós-graduação em Fonoaudiologia, Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho - (UNESP) - São Paulo (SP), Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7934-4353
Pedro de Lemos MenezesDepartamento de Fonoaudiologia, Universidade Estadual de Ciências da Saúde de Alagoas - UNCISAL - Maceió (AL), Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1999-5055
Cleide Fernandes TeixeiraDepartamento de Fonoaudiologia, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE - Recife (PE), Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9869-4431
Karina Paes AdvínculaPrograma de Pós-graduação em Saúde da Comunicação Humana, Departamento de Fonoaudiologia, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE - Recife (PE), Brasil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1314-6100
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco · BRUniversidade Estadual de Ciências da Saúde de Alagoas · BRUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo analyze the effect of masking on the Cortical Auditory Evoked Potential with speech stimulus in young adults.

methodsFourteen individuals aged between 19 and 28 years of both sexes with no hearing loss participated in the study. The Cortical Auditory Evoked Potential examination was performed with synthetic speech stimulus /ba/ simultaneous to Speech Shaped Noise presented under three conditions: steady noise with a 30 dB SPLep intensity (weak steady noise), steady noise with a 65 dB SPLep intensity o (strong steady noise) and modulated noise with 30 dB SPLep and 65 dB SPLep intensities at 25Hz and modulation period of 40 ms.

resultsHigher latencies were observed in the cortical components, except P2, in the condition of strong steady noise and more meaningful measures of amplitude of the cortical components P1, N1 and P2 in the condition of modulated noise with statistically significant difference in comparison to the strong steady noise condition. There was worse wave morphology in the condition of strong steady noise, when compared to the other records. The average electrophysiological thresholds for the conditions of strong steady noise and modulated noise were 60 dB SPLep and 49 dB SPLep, respectively, showing a 11.7 dB mean difference.

conclusionWe could infer that there was a lower masking effect of modulated noise when compared to the strong steady noise condition, in the amplitude measurements of the cortical components and an average difference of 11.7 dB between the electrophysiological thresholds (interpreted as the measure of the Masking Release).

Indexed as

SpeechSpeech PerceptionAcoustic StimulationAdultEvoked Potentials, AuditoryFemaleHumansMaleNoisePerceptual MaskingYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID36541959
PMCPMC10010424
OpenAlexW4311946062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read16
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.