ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
fNIRS vs. EEG in audiological diagnostics: novel approaches to recording brain responses to auditory stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Electroencephalography (EEG) is the traditional method for Auditory Evoked Potentials (AEPs) like Brainstem Auditory Evoked Response (BERA), offering excellent temporal resolution but facing limitations in portability and patient comfort. This study investigates functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS) as a non-invasive, hemodynamic-based alternative. Methods: We performed simultaneous EEG and fNIRS measurements on healthy volunteers to compare responses to two auditory stimuli: rapid "clicks" ( Results: For rapid click stimulation, EEG demonstrated its superiority in detecting millisecond-scale Jewett waves. While fNIRS showed transient features in temporal proximity to auditory brainstem responses (ABRs), it could not resolve these fast potentials. For the slower warble stimulation, fNIRS excelled, detecting significant hemodynamic changes in all participants. A comprehensive analysis, including a repeated-measures Analysis of Spatial Specificity (ANOVA), confirmed a highly structured, repeatable, and spatially specific response, arguing against systemic artifacts and supporting a neural origin. Conclusion: EEG remains the indispensable tool for rapid auditory brainstem diagnostics. However, fNIRS shows significant potential for measuring robust cortical responses to slower, more complex auditory stimuli. With advantages in comfort and portability, fNIRS can serve as a valuable complement to EEG, particularly in clinical scenarios where EEG application is constrained, such as in pediatric or mobile audiological assessments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.