ArticleAmerican journal of audiology2025
Test-Retest Differences in the Wideband Middle Ear Muscle Reflex.
Article in American journal of audiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rapid Characterization of Middle-Ear Muscle Reflexes Using Swept Elicitors.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2026Article
- Associations between physiological indicators of cochlear deafferentation and listening effort in military Veterans with normal audiograms.Hearing research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAssessment of the middle ear muscle reflex (MEMR) is a standard part of the clinical audiological test battery that is used to assess middle ear function and identify possible retrocochlear lesions. The use of a wideband MEMR probe allows for additional information across frequency and lower reflex thresholds compared to the standard tonal probe used clinically. Recent animal studies suggest that the wideband MEMR is sensitive to noise-induced cochlear synaptopathy, the selective loss of the synaptic connections between the inner hair cells and the afferent auditory nerve fibers. However, the clinical utility of the wideband MEMR as an indicator of cochlear deafferentation is still unclear. Prior to adoption of the wideband MEMR as part of a diagnostic battery for cochlear deafferentation, it is necessary to determine the test-retest reliability of the measurement.
methodIn a sample of 45 adults with normal hearing and normal tympanograms, wideband MEMR magnitude and threshold were measured at two different test sessions in response to a contralateral broadband noise stimulus at elicitor levels ranging from 60 to 100 dB SPL. The time between test sessions ranged from 2 hr to 5 months.
resultsTest-retest differences increased with elicitor level. In some individuals, there were changes in the magnitude and/or the frequency response of the MEMR between test sessions.
conclusionWhen wideband MEMR testing becomes clinically available, test-retest differences in contralateral wideband MEMR magnitude and threshold can be referenced by clinicians to help with interpretation of wideband MEMR test results. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.28454612.
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.