Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39854620›Full record

ArticleeLife2024

Aberrant auditory prediction patterns robustly characterize tinnitus.

Lisa Reisinger, Gianpaolo Demarchi, Jonas Obleser, William Sedley, Marta Partyka, Juliane Schubert, Quirin Gehmacher, Sebastian Roesch, Nina Suess, Eugen Trinka and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Direct evidence for synaptic density changes in tinnitus:European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

12 authors.

Lisa Reisinger *Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience and Department of Psychology, Paris-Lodron-University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8125-850X
Gianpaolo Demarchi *Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience and Department of Psychology, Paris-Lodron-University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Jonas ObleserDepartment of Psychology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7619-0459
William SedleyTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Marta PartykaCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience and Department of Psychology, Paris-Lodron-University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Juliane SchubertCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience and Department of Psychology, Paris-Lodron-University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2536-6522
Quirin GehmacherWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Sebastian RoeschDepartment of Otolaryngology, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Nina SuessCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience and Department of Psychology, Paris-Lodron-University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Eugen TrinkaCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience and Department of Psychology, Paris-Lodron-University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Winfried SchleeDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Nathan WeiszCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience and Department of Psychology, Paris-Lodron-University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7816-0037

Funding

Land Salzburg 20204-WISS/225/288/4-2021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phantom perceptions like tinnitus occur without any identifiable environmental or bodily source. The mechanisms and key drivers behind tinnitus are poorly understood. The dominant framework, suggesting that tinnitus results from neural hyperactivity in the auditory pathway following hearing damage, has been difficult to investigate in humans and has reached explanatory limits. As a result, researchers have tried to explain perceptual and potential neural aberrations in tinnitus within a more parsimonious predictive-coding framework. In two independent magnetoencephalography studies, participants passively listened to sequences of pure tones with varying levels of regularity (i.e. predictability) ranging from random to ordered. Aside from being a replication of the first study, the pre-registered second study, including 80 participants, ensured rigorous matching of hearing status, as well as age, sex, and hearing loss, between individuals with and without tinnitus. Despite some changes in the details of the paradigm, both studies equivalently reveal a group difference in neural representation, based on multivariate pattern analysis, of upcoming stimuli before their onset. These data strongly suggest that individuals with tinnitus engage anticipatory auditory predictions differently to controls. While the observation of different predictive processes is robust and replicable, the precise neurocognitive mechanism underlying it calls for further, ideally longitudinal, studies to establish its role as a potential contributor to, and/or consequence of, tinnitus.

Indexed as

Auditory PerceptionTinnitusAcoustic StimulationAdultAgedFemaleHumansMagnetoencephalographyMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adultauditory cortexhearing losshumanneurosciencetinnitus

Identifiers

PMID39854620
PMCPMC11684784

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.