ArticleScientific reports2024
Psychoacoustic and electroencephalographic responses to changes in amplitude modulation depth and frequency in relation to speech recognition in cochlear implantees.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validating the Iowa Test of Consonant Perception in a large cohort of cochlear implant users.JASA express letters · 2025Article
- Neuromorphic algorithms for brain implants: a review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Temporal envelope modulations (TEMs) are one of the most important features that cochlear implant (CI) users rely on to understand speech. Electroencephalographic assessment of TEM encoding could help clinicians to predict speech recognition more objectively, even in patients unable to provide active feedback. The acoustic change complex (ACC) and the auditory steady-state response (ASSR) evoked by low-frequency amplitude-modulated pulse trains can be used to assess TEM encoding with electrical stimulation of individual CI electrodes. In this study, we focused on amplitude modulation detection (AMD) and amplitude modulation frequency discrimination (AMFD) with stimulation of a basal versus an apical electrode. In twelve adult CI users, we (a) assessed behavioral AMFD thresholds and (b) recorded cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs), AMD-ACC, AMFD-ACC, and ASSR in a combined 3-stimulus paradigm. We found that the electrophysiological responses were significantly higher for apical than for basal stimulation. Peak amplitudes of AMFD-ACC were small and (therefore) did not correlate with speech-in-noise recognition. We found significant correlations between speech-in-noise recognition and (a) behavioral AMFD thresholds and (b) AMD-ACC peak amplitudes. AMD and AMFD hold potential to develop a clinically applicable tool for assessing TEM encoding to predict speech recognition in CI users.
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.