Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40568573›Full record

ArticleNeuroimage. Reports2024

Cortical thickness differences between hearing and perinatally deaf cats using ultra-high field MRI.

Stephen G Gordon, Alessandra Sacco, Stephen G Lomber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroimage. Reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Stephen G GordonIntegrated Program in Neuroscience, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Alessandra SaccoIntegrated Program in Neuroscience, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Stephen G LomberIntegrated Program in Neuroscience, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the absence of hearing, the plastic nature of the cerebral cortex allows select regions to be repurposed to serve the processing of remaining sensory modalities. This plasticity can be observed in many ways, including measuring the thickness differences of cortical gray matter between hearing and deaf populations to detect regional adaptations. In this study, T1-weighted images were acquired for hearing (n = 38) and perinatally-deafened (n = 31) cats using an ultra-high field 7T MRI scanner to identify normative feline cortical thickness, as well as areas of differing thickness between groups. Most significant changes to sensory-related regions demonstrated thicker cortices in the deaf compared to the hearing group, while specific non-sensory regions were found to be thinner. Furthermore, there was a modest lateralized component, finding that the gray matter of the left hemisphere was more susceptible to thickness changes following auditory deprivation. These results suggest distinct factors driving the adaptations in sensory versus non-sensory cortices in the brain following deafness, and reinforces the task-retainment model of crossmodal plasticity.

Indexed as

Compensatory crossmodal plasticityFelineGray matterSensory cortexStructural MRI

Identifiers

PMID40568573
PMCPMC12172919

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.