ArticleClinical neurophysiology practice2026
Exploring electrode montasges to optimize the non-invasive clinical recording of auditory evoked AP/wave I.
Article in Clinical neurophysiology practice, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: In clinical routine, the use of electrocochleography (Ecog) has sparked renewed interest with new less invasive electrodes (gold eartip electrode) to document complex pathological entities such as endocochlear hydrops, auditory neuropathies, cochlear synaptopathy but also monitoring intracranial pressure changes. To minimize variability due to methodological factors, this study aims to compare, in normal-hearing adults (both gender), the compound action potential (AP)/wave I amplitude recorded with earlobe and ear canal electrodes as well as the effect of click polarity (rarefaction vs. condensation). Results: All electrophysiological tests were collected using a conventional clinical evoked potential measuring system. The results for AP/wave I latency remained relatively stable between the Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) and Ecog recording protocols, with a trend toward shorter latencies with rarefaction polarity in women. Our findings support the use of the ear canal electrode with both ABR and Ecog protocols; a vertical electrode montage and rarefaction click polarity consistently provide significantly higher amplitudes for AP/wave I in both genders. Discussion: While Ecog has long been used for the objective diagnosis and monitoring of endolymphatic hydrops, Ecog can be also used in the diagnosis of auditory neuropathy. Recent findings from animal studies suggest that the emergence of AP/wave I is a sensitive indicator of age-related or noise-induced cochlear synaptic loss (cochlear synaptopathy). It therefore seems essential to have an optimized Ecog protocol for a more sensitive evaluation of the morphology of AP/wave I as indispensable tool to improve understanding of different pathological entities.
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.