ReviewThe European journal of neuroscience2025
Optimized Simultaneous Assessment of Subcortical and Cortical Auditory Responses Through a Frequency-Tagged Roving Paradigm.
Review in The European journal of neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Active Task Engagement Enhances Auditory Brain-Behaviour Prediction From Single-Trial EEG Compared With Passive Listening.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- Concurrent Assessment of Sequential Auditory Event-Related Potentials Using an Optimized Paired-Stimulus Local-Global Paradigm.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Review
- Optimized Simultaneous Assessment of Subcortical and Cortical Auditory Responses Through a Frequency-Tagged Roving Paradigm.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Assessment of auditory-evoked responses across multiple stages of the ascending auditory pathway provides complementary insights into neural integrity for research and clinical contexts. However, traditional approaches, constrained by conflicting optimal parameters, require separate sessions for different response types, limiting efficiency and preventing simultaneous multi-level assessment, while evidence of individual-level sensitivity and reliability remains limited. We aimed to develop and validate a paradigm enabling concurrent, single-subject assessment of frequency-following responses (FFRs), auditory steady-state responses (ASSRs), and event-related potentials (ERPs) spanning subcortical to cortical levels. Two amplitude-modulated tones (carriers at 220/440 Hz, modulated at 40/80 Hz) were presented in a roving sequence so that each tone served as both standard and deviant, and EEG was recorded using a two-electrode montage (Fz, Cz) EEG setup. In 32 healthy participants, the paradigm achieved 100% sensitivity for high-frequency FFRs and gamma-band ASSRs, confirmed by permutation-based spectral analysis. Machine-learning classification distinguished stimulus conditions from resting state based on N1 and sustained negativity in all participants (32/32), confirming robust single-subject detection of obligatory cortical responses. Directional asymmetry was observed in transition responses: ascending frequency transitions predominantly elicited enhanced N1-P2-like responses (32/32), whereas descending transitions evoked mismatch negativity-like (MMN-like) responses in 30/32 participants. Recording-duration analysis showed that overall detection sensitivity across response components reached 0.91 after 27 min of recording. Collectively, these findings indicate that the frequency-tagged roving paradigm provides a framework for characterizing auditory processing across hierarchical levels within a single session, supporting potential use in future experimental and translational studies.
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.