Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38763034›Full record

ArticleHearing research2024

Objective measure of binaural processing: Acoustic change complex in response to interaural phase differences.

Yibo Fan, René H Gifford

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hearing research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07356128 (Binaural Cue Sensitivity in Children and Adults With Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation), which is not on this 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.

NCT07356128 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Binaural Cue Sensitivity in Children and Adults With Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation

TypeobservationalSponsorHearts for HearingRan2025 to 2028Enrolled200ConditionsBilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Cochlear Implant, Hearing Preservation, Electric and Acoustic SimulationArmsbinaural processing over time, binaural processing over time for children and adults with normal hearing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  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

2 authors.

Yibo FanDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, Vanderbilt University, School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232, USA.
René H GiffordDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, Vanderbilt University, School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232, USA. Electronic address: rene.gifford@vanderbilt.edu.

Funding

Binaural cue sensitivity in children and adults with combined electric and acoustic stimulationR01DC020194 · NIDCD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI Rene H Gifford · 2023 to 2026
$2.6M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC020194
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Combining cochlear implants with binaural acoustic hearing via preserved hearing in the implanted ear(s) is commonly referred to as combined electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS). EAS fittings can provide patients with significant benefit for speech recognition in complex noise, perceived listening difficulty, and horizontal-plane localization as compared to traditional bimodal hearing conditions with contralateral and monaural acoustic hearing. However, EAS benefit varies across patients and the degree of benefit is not reliably related to the underlying audiogram. Previous research has indicated that EAS benefit for speech recognition in complex listening scenarios and localization is significantly correlated with the patients' binaural cue sensitivity, namely interaural time differences (ITD). In the context of pure tones, interaural phase differences (IPD) and ITD can be understood as two perspectives on the same phenomenon. Through simple mathematical conversion, one can be transformed into the other, illustrating their inherent interrelation for spatial hearing abilities. However, assessing binaural cue sensitivity is not part of a clinical assessment battery as psychophysical tasks are time consuming, require training to achieve performance asymptote, and specialized programming and software all of which render this clinically unfeasible. In this study, we investigated the possibility of using an objective measure of binaural cue sensitivity by the acoustic change complex (ACC) via imposition of an IPD of varying degrees at stimulus midpoint. Ten adult listeners with normal hearing were assessed on tasks of behavioral and objective binaural cue sensitivity for carrier frequencies of 250 and 1000 Hz. Results suggest that 1) ACC amplitude increases with IPD; 2) ACC-based IPD sensitivity for 250 Hz is significantly correlated with behavioral ITD sensitivity; 3) Participants were more sensitive to IPDs at 250 Hz as compared to 1000 Hz. Thus, this objective measure of IPD sensitivity may hold clinical application for pre- and post-operative assessment for individuals meeting candidacy indications for cochlear implantation with low-frequency acoustic hearing preservation as this relatively quick and objective measure may provide clinicians with information identifying patients most likely to derive benefit from EAS technology.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAuditory ThresholdCochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsCuesSound LocalizationSpeech PerceptionAdultAgedAudiometry, Pure-ToneElectric StimulationFemaleHearingHumansMaleMiddle AgedAcoustic change complex (ACC)BinauralCortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEP)Interaural phase differences (IPD)Interaural time differences (ITD)

Identifiers

PMID38763034
PMCPMC12270472

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.