ArticleAudiology research2024
Electric Auditory Brainstem Response Audiometry in Cochlear Implants: New Recording Paradigm.
Article in Audiology research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guideline
- Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: Cochlear implants (CIs) are widely applied to recover audition for patients with severe degrees of or total hearing loss. Electrical stimulation using the electrically evoked ABR (E-ABR) can be recorded in CI recipients through the device. This work was designed to study E-ABR recorded individually from different channels located at the apical, middle, and basal cochlear regions in comparison to their simultaneous separated or adjacent combined recordings. (2) Methods: This study included 17 children fitted with unilateral cochlear implants. All children were subjected to impedance measurement, electrical compound action potentials (ECAP), and E-ABR recording of three channels located at the apical, middle, and basal cochlear regions. This was followed by simultaneous E-ABR recording of the three "separated" channels in comparison to E-ABR recording from three adjacent channels located at the middle cochlear region. (3) Results: Similar E-ABR latencies and amplitudes were found using either individual or simultaneously separated or adjacent combined recording. However, the mean amplitude measures of E-ABR for combined adjacent channels showed a positive correlation with the applied current level. (4) Conclusions: Combined E-ABR recording from adjacent channels is a faster and more reliable technique that can be used effectively without compromising the results of the recorded E-ABR.
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.