ArticleBrain and behavior2025
Visual Modulation of Acoustic Reflex Measurements: Insights Into Sensory Integration.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim was to investigate the impact of visual tasks on acoustic reflex thresholds (ARTs) and AR latencies (ARLs) during AR measurements.
methodsA total of 31 participants (17 female, 14 male; mean age: 20.3 ± 1.8 years) with normal hearing and Type A tympanograms were included. ARTs and latencies were measured using a 226 Hz probe tone under five distinct conditions: (1) resting with no visual task, (2) eyes comfortably closed, (3) fixed gaze on a stationary object, (4) saccadic eye movements, and (5) optokinetic eye movements. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA with Bonferroni correction applied for post hoc comparisons.
resultsARTs were significantly lower in the condition of eyes closed compared to fixed gaze, at both 1 and 2 kHz (p < 0.05). ARLs at 500 Hz were significantly shorter in the condition of fixed gaze compared to saccadic eye movements (p < 0.05). A significant interaction between frequency and condition was observed for ARTs, indicating frequency-specific modulation by visual tasks, whereas no significant frequency and condition interaction was found for ARLs.
conclusionVisual tasks have a measurable effect on ARTs and latencies, likely due to cross-modal interactions between the auditory and visual systems. These results highlight the importance of standardizing visual and attentional conditions during clinical AR testing. Further research is warranted to elucidate the underlying neural mechanisms and their clinical implications.
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.