Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40766385›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025

Distinct cortical encoding of acoustic and electrical cochlear stimulation.

Ariel Edward Hight, Michele N Insanally, Julia K Scarpa, Yew-Song Cheng, Michael Trumpis, Jonathan Viventi, Mario A Svirsky, Robert C Froemke

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 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

8 authors.

Ariel Edward HightTranslational Neuroscience Institute, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016.
Michele N InsanallyDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016.
Julia K ScarpaDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016.
Yew-Song ChengDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016.
Michael TrumpisDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Jonathan ViventiDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Mario A SvirskyTranslational Neuroscience Institute, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016.
Robert C FroemkeTranslational Neuroscience Institute, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016.ORCID 0000-0002-1230-6811

Funding

Synaptic basis of perceptual learning with cochlear implants in rat auditory cortex - RenewalR01DC012557 · NIDCD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI Robert Crooks Froemke, Mario A Svirsky · 2013 to 2026
$7.0M
NRSA Training CoreTL1TR001447 · NCATS · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI MICOLI, KEITH J. · 2015 to 2025
$5.9M
Neuroplasticity and early cochlear implant useK99DC021727 · NIDCD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI HIGHT, ARIEL EDWARD · 2024 to 2025
$252k
Neuroplasticity and Cochlear Implant Use in RodentsF30DC015170 · NIDCD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI SCARPA, JULIA · 2016 to 2018
$118k
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001447NIDCD NIH HHS F30 DC015170NIDCD NIH HHS K99 DC021727NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC012557
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cochlear implants are neuroprosthetic devices that restore hearing and speech comprehension to profoundly deaf humans, and represent an exemplar application of biomedical engineering and research to clinical conditions. However, the utility of these devices in many subjects is limited, largely due to lack of information about how neural circuits respond to implant stimulation. Recently we showed that deafened rats can use cochlear implants to recognize sounds, and that this training refined the responses of single neurons in the primary auditory cortex. Here we asked how local populations of cortical neurons represent acute implant stimuli, using electrode arrays we developed for cortical surface recordings for micro-electrocorticography (μECoG), a form of intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG). We found that there was a limited tonotopic organization across recording sites, relative to a clearer tonotopic spatial representation in normal-hearing rats. Single-trial iEEG responses to acoustic inputs were more reliable than responses to cochlear implant stimulation, although stimulus identity could be successfully decoded in both cases. However, the spatio-temporal response profiles to acoustic vs cochlear implant stimulation were substantially different. Decoders trained on acoustic responses showed essentially zero information transfer when tested on electrical stimulation responses in the same animals after deafening and cochlear implant stimulation. Thus while acute cochlear implant stimulation might activate the auditory cortex in a cochleotopic manner, the dynamics of network activity are quite distinct, suggesting that pitch percepts from acoustic and electrical stimulation are fundamentally different.

Identifiers

PMID40766385
PMCPMC12324511

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.