↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Temporal Response Properties of the Auditory Nerve in Implanted Children with Auditory Neuropathy Spectrum Disorder and Implanted Children with Sensorineural Hearing Loss
Published in
Ear and hearing (Print), July 2016
DOI 10.1097/aud.0000000000000254
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shuman He, Paul J. Abbas, Danielle V. Doyle, Tyler C. McFayden, Stephen Mulherin

Abstract

This study aimed to (1) characterize temporal response properties of the auditory nerve in implanted children with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD), and (2) compare results recorded in implanted children with ANSD with those measured in implanted children with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Participants included 28 children with ANSD and 29 children with SNHL. All subjects used cochlear nucleus devices in their test ears. Both ears were tested in 6 children with ANSD and 3 children with SNHL. For all other subjects, only one ear was tested. The electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) was measured in response to each of the 33 pulses in a pulse train (excluding the second pulse) for one apical, one middle-array, and one basal electrode. The pulse train was presented in a monopolar-coupled stimulation mode at 4 pulse rates: 500, 900, 1800, and 2400 pulses per second. Response metrics included the averaged amplitude, latencies of response components and response width, the alternating depth and the amount of neural adaptation. These dependent variables were quantified based on the last six ECAPs or the six ECAPs occurring within a time window centered around 11 to 12 msec. A generalized linear mixed model was used to compare these dependent variables between the 2 subject groups. The slope of the linear fit of the normalized ECAP amplitudes (re. amplitude of the first ECAP response) over the duration of the pulse train was used to quantify the amount of ECAP increment over time for a subgroup of 9 subjects. Pulse train-evoked ECAPs were measured in all but 8 subjects (5 with ANSD and 3 with SNHL). ECAPs measured in children with ANSD had smaller amplitude, longer averaged P2 latency and greater response width than children with SNHL. However, differences in these two groups were only observed for some electrodes. No differences in averaged N1 latency or in the alternating depth were observed between children with ANSD and children with SNHL. Neural adaptation measured in these 2 subject groups was comparable for relatively short durations of stimulation (i.e., 11 to 12 msec). Children with ANSD showed greater neural adaptation than children with SNHL for a longer duration of stimulation. Amplitudes of ECAP responses rapidly declined within the first few milliseconds of stimulation, followed by a gradual decline up to 64 msec after stimulus onset in the majority of subjects. This decline exhibited an alternating pattern at some pulse rates. Further increases in pulse rate diminished this alternating pattern. In contrast, ECAPs recorded from at least one stimulating electrode in six ears with ANSD and three ears with SNHL showed a clear increase in amplitude over the time course of stimulation. The slope of linear regression functions measured in these subjects was significantly greater than zero. Some but not all aspects of temporal response properties of the auditory nerve measured in this study differ between implanted children with ANSD and implanted children with SNHL. These differences are observed for some but not all electrodes. A new neural response pattern is identified. Further studies investigating its underlying mechanism and clinical relevance are warranted.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Researcher 8 13%
Other 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 21%
Neuroscience 5 8%
Engineering 5 8%
Psychology 3 5%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 18 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 August 2016.
All research outputs
#27,696,393
of 34,324,933 outputs
Outputs from Ear and hearing (Print)
#1,612
of 2,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,091
of 340,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ear and hearing (Print)
#29
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,324,933 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,253 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 340,776 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.