ArticleNeuroscience insights2024
Revisiting the Chicken Auditory Brainstem Response: Frequency Specificity, Threshold Sensitivity, and Cross Species Comparison.
Article in Neuroscience insights, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The auditory brainstem response (ABR) is important for both clinical and basic auditory research. It is a non-invasive measure of hearing function with millisecond-level precision. The ABR can not only measure the synchrony, speed, and efficacy of auditory physiology but also detect different modalities of hearing pathology and hearing loss. ABRs are easily acquired in vertebrate animal models like reptiles, birds, and mammals, and complement existing molecular, developmental, and systems-level research. One such model system is the chicken; an excellent animal for studying auditory development, structure, and function. However, the ABR for chickens was last reported nearly 4 decades ago. The current study examines how decades of ABR characterization in other animal species support findings from the chicken ABR. We replicated and expanded on previous research using 43 chicken hatchlings 1- and 2-day post-hatch. We report that click-evoked chicken ABRs presented with a peak waveform morphology, amplitude, and latency like previous avian studies. Tone-evoked ABRs were found for frequencies from 250 to 4000 Hertz (Hz) and exhibited a range of best sensitivity between 750 and 2000 Hz. Objective click-evoked and tone-evoked ABR thresholds were comparable to subjective thresholds. With these revisited measurements, the chicken ABR still proves to be an excellent example of precocious avian development that complements decades of molecular, neuronal, and systems-level research in the same model organism.
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.