Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38680894›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2024

Rate dependent neural responses of interaural-time-difference cues in fine-structure and envelope.

Hongmei Hu, Stephan D Ewert, Birger Kollmeier, Deborah Vickers

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

4 authors.

Hongmei HuSOUND Lab, Cambridge Hearing Group, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Cambridge University, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Stephan D EwertDepartment of Medical Physics and Acoustics, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
Birger KollmeierDepartment of Medical Physics and Acoustics, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany.
Deborah VickersSOUND Lab, Cambridge Hearing Group, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Cambridge University, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7498-5637

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S002537/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advancements in cochlear implants (CIs) have led to a significant increase in bilateral CI users, especially among children. Yet, most bilateral CI users do not fully achieve the intended binaural benefit due to potential limitations in signal processing and/or surgical implant positioning. One crucial auditory cue that normal hearing (NH) listeners can benefit from is the interaural time difference (ITD),

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantsCuesElectroencephalographyAcoustic StimulationAuditory PerceptionEvoked Potentials, AuditoryHumansSound LocalizationTime FactorsAcoustic change responseAuditory steady-state responseCochlear implantCortical auditory evoked potentialInteraural phase differenceP1-N1-P2 complexSpatial hearing

Identifiers

PMID38680894
PMCPMC11055513

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.