ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Myogenic artifacts masquerade as neuroplasticity in the auditory frequency-following response (FFR).
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The frequency-following response (FFR) is an evoked potential that provides a "neural fingerprint" of complex sound encoding in the brain. FFRs have been widely used to characterize speech and music processing, experience-dependent neuroplasticity (e.g., learning, musicianship), and biomarkers for hearing and language-based disorders that distort receptive communication abilities. It is widely assumed FFRs stem from a mixture of phase-locked neurogenic activity from brainstem and cortical structures along the hearing neuraxis. Here, we challenge this prevailing view by demonstrating upwards of ~50% of the FFR can originate from a non-neural source: contamination from the postauricular muscle (PAM) vestigial startle reflex. We first establish PAM artifact is present in all ears, varies with electrode proximity to the muscle, and can be experimentally manipulated by directing listeners' eye gaze toward the ear of sound stimulation. We then show this muscular noise easily confounds auditory FFRs, spuriously amplifying responses by 3-4x fold with tandem PAM contraction and even explaining putative FFR enhancements observed in highly skilled musicians. Our findings expose a new and unrecognized myogenic source to the FFR that drives its large inter-subject variability and cast doubt on whether changes in the response typically attributed to neuroplasticity/pathology are solely of brain origin.
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.