ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2025
Frequency Following Responses to Electric Cochlear Stimulation in an Animal Model.
Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Chronic Auditory-Nerve Implant Enhances Brainstem Phase Locking to Electric Pulse Trains.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 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
purposePresent-day cochlear-implant (CI) users can achieve high levels of speech reception in quiet surroundings. Nevertheless, sensitivity to the temporal pitch of sounds is limited, which contributes to deficits in speech reception amid multiple talkers and in appreciation of musical melodies. Short-term, invasive neurophysiological studies in animals have demonstrated limitations in neural phase locking in the tonotopic range of the auditory pathway that is activated by CIs. It remains an open question, however, whether those neural limitations can account for perceptual deficits in those animal species, let alone in human CI users. For that reason, we have evaluated non-invasive recordings of phase locking from cats chronically implanted with a CI.
methodsTen deafened cats (eight female) were implanted with an animal version of a clinical CI array. The electrically evoked frequency following response (eFFRs) was recorded from the scalps of sedated animals at ≥ 10 weeks post-implantation. Stimuli consisted of constant-amplitude electrical pulse trains at rates from ~ 40 to 640 pulses per second.
resultsRecordings of the eFFR demonstrated robust responses synchronized to electrical pulse trains across all stimulus rates. Analyses of eFFR amplitude and phase transfer functions confirmed that the eFFR, as with its normal-hearing counterpart, originates from multiple subcortical and cortical generators. The slopes of segments of eFFR phase transfer functions revealed stimulus-to-response latencies of generators that dominated the eFFR across restricted ranges of pulse rates. Those rate ranges must coincide with the limits of phase locking by putative generators at successive levels of the auditory neuroaxis and could inform our understanding of the limits to perceptual temporal acuity.
conclusionThe eFFR demonstrated here in an animal model provides a valuable non-invasive measure of temporal processing in electric cochlear stimulation that can be related to ongoing perceptual measures in the same animals and is well-suited to evaluate novel modes of auditory prosthesis for enhancing temporal acuity.
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.