ArticlePloS one2015
Aided and unaided speech perception by older hearing impaired listeners.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility of Ecological Momentary Assessment in the Indian Context to Address Challenges Associated with Hearing-Aid Use.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2026Article
- Cross-Modal Sensory Boosting to Improve High-Frequency Hearing Loss: Device Development and Validation.JMIRx med · 2024Article
- The effect of motor resource suppression on speech perception in noise in younger and older listeners: An online study.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Underlying neural mechanisms of degraded speech intelligibility following noise-induced hearing loss: The importance of distorted tonotopy.Hearing research · 2022Review
- Adaptive Syllable Training Improves Phoneme Identification in Older Listeners with and without Hearing Loss.Audiology research · 2022Article
- Compression and amplification algorithms in hearing aids impair the selectivity of neural responses to speech.Nature biomedical engineering · 2022Article
- Measuring Speech Intelligibility and Hearing-Aid Benefit Using Everyday Conversational Sentences in Real-World Environments.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Feasibility of Virtual Reality Audiological Testing: Prospective Study.JMIR serious games · 2021Article
- The potential of miR-183 family expression in inner ear for regeneration, treatment, diagnosis and prognosis of hearing loss.Journal of otology · 2017Review
- Quality of life after intervention with a cochlear implant or hearing aid.The Laryngoscope · 2016Observational
- Speech perception in older hearing impaired listeners: benefits of perceptual training.PloS one · 2015Article
- Influence of Three Auditory Profiles on Aided Speech Perception in Different Noise Scenarios.Trends in hearingArticle
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The most common complaint of older hearing impaired (OHI) listeners is difficulty understanding speech in the presence of noise. However, tests of consonant-identification and sentence reception threshold (SeRT) provide different perspectives on the magnitude of impairment. Here we quantified speech perception difficulties in 24 OHI listeners in unaided and aided conditions by analyzing (1) consonant-identification thresholds and consonant confusions for 20 onset and 20 coda consonants in consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) syllables presented at consonant-specific signal-to-noise (SNR) levels, and (2) SeRTs obtained with the Quick Speech in Noise Test (QSIN) and the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT). Compared to older normal hearing (ONH) listeners, nearly all unaided OHI listeners showed abnormal consonant-identification thresholds, abnormal consonant confusions, and reduced psychometric function slopes. Average elevations in consonant-identification thresholds exceeded 35 dB, correlated strongly with impairments in mid-frequency hearing, and were greater for hard-to-identify consonants. Advanced digital hearing aids (HAs) improved average consonant-identification thresholds by more than 17 dB, with significant HA benefit seen in 83% of OHI listeners. HAs partially normalized consonant-identification thresholds, reduced abnormal consonant confusions, and increased the slope of psychometric functions. Unaided OHI listeners showed much smaller elevations in SeRTs (mean 6.9 dB) than in consonant-identification thresholds and SeRTs in unaided listening conditions correlated strongly (r = 0.91) with identification thresholds of easily identified consonants. HAs produced minimal SeRT benefit (2.0 dB), with only 38% of OHI listeners showing significant improvement. HA benefit on SeRTs was accurately predicted (r = 0.86) by HA benefit on easily identified consonants. Consonant-identification tests can accurately predict sentence processing deficits and HA benefit in OHI listeners.
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.