ArticleCoDAS2025
Neural auditory encoding and performance in speech-in-noise perception: a pilot study.
Article in CoDAS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effect of Lateralization, Age, and Sex on Frequency Following Response in Children: Neural Speech Encoding to a 170 ms [da] Stimulus.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate and characterize the Frequency Following Response (FFR) and performance on the speech-in-noise test in adults who are native speakers of Brazilian Portuguese, as well as to assess the potential correlation between the two measures.
methodsA total of 28 individuals aged 18 to 29 years, with no diagnosis of hearing loss or history of conditions affecting hearing, participated in the study. Eligibility assessments included hearing sensitivity tests and mental status screening. The research assessments comprised the Portuguese Sentence List and FFR recordings.
resultsThe mean signal-to-noise ratio was -0.73 dB, ranging from -4.6 dB to 1.6 dB. In the FFR, all components were identified in 100% of participants, except for component C, which was present in 96.43%. A significant positive correlation was observed between the signal-to-noise ratio and the latencies of components A and C, while a significant negative correlation was found between the signal-to-noise ratio and the amplitudes of components A and D.
conclusionFFR results determined characteristics of the present population, with component values similar to those reported in the Brazilian population. Better performance in speech-in-noise perception was correlated with shorter neural encoding time for the 'voice onset time' and greater neural recruitment for encoding the sound structure of the vowel.
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.