ArticleBiology2024
Neural Delays in Processing Speech in Background Noise Minimized after Short-Term Auditory Training.
Article in Biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrophysiological Correlates of Familial Dyslexia in Two Siblings: A Case Report.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Neural speech encoding in fetal alcohol spectrum disorder: an exploratory study using frequency-following responses.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Neural speech encoding advantages associated with higher socioeconomic status extend to noise conditions with differential susceptibility.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
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
Background noise disrupts the neural processing of sound, resulting in delayed and diminished far-field auditory-evoked responses. In young adults, we previously provided evidence that cognitively based short-term auditory training can ameliorate the impact of background noise on the frequency-following response (FFR), leading to greater neural synchrony to the speech fundamental frequency(F0) in noisy listening conditions. In this same dataset (55 healthy young adults), we now examine whether training-related changes extend to the latency of the FFR, with the prediction of faster neural timing after training. FFRs were measured on two days separated by ~8 weeks. FFRs were elicited by the syllable "da" presented at a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of +10 dB SPL relative to a background of multi-talker noise. Half of the participants participated in 20 sessions of computerized training (Listening and Communication Enhancement Program, LACE) between test sessions, while the other half served as Controls. In both groups, half of the participants were non-native speakers of English. In the Control Group, response latencies were unchanged at retest, but for the training group, response latencies were earlier. Findings suggest that auditory training can improve how the adult nervous system responds in noisy listening conditions, as demonstrated by decreased response latencies.
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.