ReviewHearing research2023
The continued importance of comparative auditory research to modern scientific discovery.
Review in Hearing research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effects of interaural time and level differences on the binaural interaction component of the auditory brainstem response in Cope's gray treefrogs.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2026Article
- Detection, communication, and individual identification with deep audio embeddings: A case study with North Atlantic right whales.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- A general mechanism of airborne hearing in recent and early non-tympanate tetrapods.The Journal of experimental biology · 2026Article
- Cochlear histopathology in macaques after noise-induced temporary threshold shifts.Hearing research · 2026Article
- Differences in auditory brainstem responses between laboratory-reared and wild-caught prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster).PloS one · 2026Article
- Review
- Auditory brainstem responses in two closely related Peromyscus species (Peromyscus leucopus and Peromyscus maniculatus).The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
- Mechanical network equivalence between the katydid and mammalian inner ears.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Finite element modelling of sound transmission in the Weberian apparatus of zebrafish (Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
A rich history of comparative research in the auditory field has afforded a synthetic view of sound information processing by ears and brains. Some organisms have proven to be powerful models for human hearing due to fundamental similarities (e.g., well-matched hearing ranges), while others feature intriguing differences (e.g., atympanic ears) that invite further study. Work across diverse "non-traditional" organisms, from small mammals to avians to amphibians and beyond, continues to propel auditory science forward, netting a variety of biomedical and technological advances along the way. In this brief review, limited primarily to tetrapod vertebrates, we discuss the continued importance of comparative studies in hearing research from the periphery to central nervous system with a focus on outstanding questions such as mechanisms for sound capture, peripheral and central processing of directional/spatial information, and non-canonical auditory processing, including efferent and hormonal effects.
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.