ArticleNeuroImage2025
Cortical oscillations predict auditory grouping in listeners with various hearing configurations.
Article in NeuroImage, 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Auditory grouping relies on the ability to bind tones with coherent spectral features over time to form auditory objects. Sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) degrades spectral resolution, and the extent of this degradation varies with the hearing configuration. However, it remains unclear how SNHL impacts auditory grouping and whether different hearing configurations affect this ability. This study investigated task performance and cortical activity during auditory object detection in four groups with different hearing configurations: Twenty normal-hearing (NH) listeners, seventeen bilateral hearing aid users with acoustic-only stimulation (A-only), thirty-one cochlear implant (CI) users with acoustic and electric stimulation (A + E), and seventeen bilateral CI users with electric-only stimulation (E-only). While electroencephalography was recorded, participants performed a stochastic figure-ground task requiring the detection of spectrally and temporally coherent tone pips embedded in a background of random-frequency tone clouds. Sensitivity to the task was high across groups, although CI groups showed poorer performance compared to NH and A-only groups. Relative to NH listeners, the object-related evoked responses were weaker in A-only listeners and absent in CI groups. Delta (2-3.5 Hz) and theta (4-7 Hz) event-related synchronization to the auditory objects were only observed in the NH group, except for the A + E group, which showed a delta synchronization. However, all groups exhibited alpha (8-15 Hz) and beta (17-30 Hz) event-related desynchronization, with no significant group differences. Notably, individual differences in alpha and beta desynchronization predicted task sensitivity. These findings suggest that alpha and beta cortical activity, measured during an auditory object detection task, reflects auditory grouping in any hearing configuration.
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.