Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40173130›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Intact sensorimotor rhythm abilities but altered audiovisual integration in cochlear implant users.

Olivier Valentin, Nicholas Elgin Vernam Foster, Bastien Intartaglia, Marie-Anne Prud'homme, Marc Schönwiesner, Sylvie Nozaradan, Alexandre Lehmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Olivier ValentinSchool of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Faculty of Health, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4636-6211
Nicholas Elgin Vernam FosterLaboratory for Brain, Music and Sound Research & Centre for Research on Brain, Language or Music, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Bastien IntartagliaLaboratory for Brain, Music and Sound Research & Centre for Research on Brain, Language or Music, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Marie-Anne Prud'hommeLaboratory for Brain, Music and Sound Research & Centre for Research on Brain, Language or Music, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Marc SchönwiesnerLaboratory for Brain, Music and Sound Research & Centre for Research on Brain, Language or Music, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2023-1207
Sylvie NozaradanLaboratory for Brain, Music and Sound Research & Centre for Research on Brain, Language or Music, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Alexandre LehmannLaboratory for Brain, Music and Sound Research & Centre for Research on Brain, Language or Music, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perception of rhythm significantly impacts various aspects of daily life, including engaging with music, discerning speech prosody nuances, and coordinating physical activities like walking and sports. Numerous studies in cognitive sciences have highlighted that human rhythmic synchronization is more precise when responding to auditory rhythmic stimuli than to visual ones when the timing cues are identical. However, deaf individuals were shown to display a heightened proficiency in synchronizing their movements with visual timing cues, outperforming hearing controls (HC). Furthermore, it was demonstrated that cochlear implant (CI) users can synchronize their movements with the rhythm of unpitched drum tones. These findings raise an important question: do CI users possess a visual synchronization advantage from their pre-implant deafness, while maintaining auditory synchronization skills comparable to those of HC? Alternatively, does the neural reorganization post-implantation negate the visual synchronization advantage acquired before the implant? This study aims to answer these questions by using a sensorimotor synchronization task to probe multisensory processing abilities in CI users. Specifically, we assessed unimodal and multimodal auditory and visual abilities in CI users compared to HC using a finger tapping synchrony task with four isochronous stimulus conditions: an auditory metronome, a visual metronome, a synchronous presentation of both the auditory and visual metronomes at the same tempo, and an asynchronous presentation of the auditory and visual stimuli at differing tempos. Synchronization to auditory stimuli surpassed synchronization to visual stimuli in both groups. CI users and HC demonstrated similar unisensory synchronization consistency within the visual and auditory conditions. While HC enhanced their consistency in the audio-visual synchronous condition compared to the unisensory visual condition, CI users did not display the same improvement. Furthermore, the interference from incongruent auditory information in the asynchronous condition was comparable in HC and CI users. This study highlights that, although pitch processing is known to be impaired in CI users, our findings suggest that rhythm processing remains relatively spared. As anticipated, CI users demonstrate similar auditory rhythmic synchronization skills to those of HC, in line with existing research. Moreover, we find that, unlike deaf individuals, CI users do not exhibit an advantage in visual rhythmic synchronization, which may be due to the relatively few CI users in the study who had early prolonged pre-implantation deafness. The observed shift in audio-visual integration among CI users suggests that post-deafness or post-implantation reorganization of their auditory cortex may impede the effective integration of temporal auditory stimulation from the implant and visual information.

Indexed as

Auditory PerceptionCochlear ImplantsDeafnessVisual PerceptionAcoustic StimulationAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhotic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID40173130
PMCPMC11964205

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.