ArticleEar and hearing
Bone-Conducted Responses Using the Parallel Auditory Brainstem Response Paradigm.
Article in Ear and hearing. 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.
- The parallel auditory brainstem response paradigm provides accurate and fast hearing thresholds in a clinic-like setting.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAuditory brainstem responses (ABRs) are used to diagnose hearing loss across multiple frequencies in infants and others who cannot participate in behavioral testing. The parallel ABR (pABR) paradigm measures response waveforms to all frequencies from 500 to 8000 Hz in both ears simultaneously, rather than serially in one ear at a time. Work so far has been conducted with air-conducted stimuli through insert earphones, but bone-conducted stimuli are also an essential part of diagnosing the type of hearing loss by determining the relative contributions of conductive and sensorineural hearing loss. This study aimed to confirm the feasibility of bone-conduction pABR.
designWe recruited a cohort of young adults with normal hearing. An intensity series of two-channel ABRs was measured to pABR stimuli played through ER-2 insert earphones, as well as with a B-81 bone vibrator with contralateral masking. Behavioral thresholds were also measured to compare dB nHL correction factors. To keep sessions under 3.5 hr only one ear was tested with bone conduction. The ear with bone conduction and the order of transducers were counterbalanced across participants. Waveform morphologies for each transducer were compared by their residual noise and their wave V latencies and amplitudes.
resultsFor the same dB nHL levels, responses to both transducers aligned well, and wave V amplitudes and latencies were similar. While stimulus artifacts can be an issue with bone conduction, the steps taken to mitigate them in air conduction pABR were also effective for bone conduction: clear bone-conducted responses were measured, and residual noise was similar for both transducers. Bone-conducted responses to 8 kHz were weak, which was not surprising given the physics of bone conduction and the output capabilities of the bone vibrator. As expected, behavioral thresholds were higher for pABR than pure-tone stimuli, and by the same offset for both transducers. The dB nHL values differed due to the difference in reference equivalent threshold levels for inserts and the bone vibrator.
conclusionsAir and bone conduction provided similar waveforms, indicating that bone-conduction pABR is feasible. Together with establishing dB nHL values, this work represents an important step toward translating the pABR for diagnosing all types of hearing loss.
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.