ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2025
The Greenwood function shows close alignment with pitch perceived by cochlear implant patients with long, flexible electrode arrays and fine-structure stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The natural, tonotopic frequency distribution of the inner ear is typically described by the Greenwood function, which logarithmically projects the audible frequency spectrum onto the intracochlear basilar membrane. Recent developments in cochlear implant (CI) programming aim to improve sound quality and music perception through consideration of the frequency distribution as described by the Greenwood function when assigning frequency bands to the individual contacts of the electrode array. This approach is commonly referred to as anatomy-based fitting (ABF). However, empirical validation of the Greenwood function to accurately describe pitch as perceived by CI users is lacking. Methods: Twelve CI patients with single-sided deafness (SSD) participated in the study. A pitch matching task was conducted at four different appointments and with two different fitting maps (standard and ABF). At each test appointment, participants were asked to set the frequency of a pure tone presented through a loudspeaker to the pitch perceived when stimulated with the single contacts of the CI electrode array. The cochlear anatomy of the patients was reconstructed based on clinical imaging to derive the location of the stimulating contacts relative to the basilar membrane, allowing for the comparison of the pitch perceived by the patients to the frequency suggested by the Greenwood function for each stimulating contact. Results: In general, subjective pitch percepts were found to agree well with the frequency suggested by the Greenwood function independent of subject, contact, or applied fitting map. Differences between pitch matches and Greenwood were found to be not statistically significant. At least part of the outcomes of previous studies reporting a basal frequency shift can be explained by the tonotopic mapping functions applied within these studies. Discussion: The present results suggest that the Greenwood function is well-suited for representing the tonotopic frequency distribution not only for normal hearing subjects but for CI recipients as well. Further advances in frequency mapping should also take the neural health of the cochlea into account, allowing for additional individualization of frequency mapping in CIs.
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.