ArticleScientific reports2025
Learning to hear again with alternating cochlear frequency allocations.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditionally, the place-pitch 'tonotopically' organized auditory neural pathway was considered to be hard-wired. Cochlear implants restore hearing by arbitrarily mapping frequency-amplitude information. This study shows that recipients, after a long period of sound deprivation, preserve a level of auditory plasticity, enabling them to swiftly and concurrently learn speech understanding with two alternating, distinct frequency maps. During rehabilitation, subjects switched maps randomly on a daily basis, serving as their own control. After stating their preference, on average, subjects maintained their hearing performance with the non-preferred, legacy map over time. In addition, subjects continued to learn and improve with their map of preference. Being able to train and process the auditory information from two maps did not seem to be a competition over neural resources, such as would be the case in a typical zero-sum game. This shows a new level of flexibility in learning and long-term adaptation of the auditory system. Practically, the required novel study design halves the sample size while mitigating order effects associated with neural plasticity, benefitting sensory-oriented trials.
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.