Trial reportPloS one2015
Effects of Active and Passive Hearing Protection Devices on Sound Source Localization, Speech Recognition, and Tone Detection.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Effectiveness of Hearing Protection Devices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Training to Improve Spatial Hearing and Situation Awareness when Wearing Hearing Protection.Military medicine · 2024Trial
- Measuring "Where": A Comparative Analysis of Methods Measuring Spatial Perception.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Perforated Concave Earplug (pCEP): A Proof-of-Concept Earplug to Improve Sound Localization without Compromising Noise Attenuation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The effects of hearing protection devices on spatial awareness in complex listening environments.PloS one · 2023Article
- Head movement and its relation to hearing.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Review
- Effect of Hearing and Head Protection on the Localization of Tonal and Broadband Reverse Alarms.Human factors · 2022Article
- Audiovisual training rapidly reduces potentially hazardous perceptual errors caused by earplugs.Hearing research · 2022Article
- Situational Awareness: The Effect of Stimulus Type and Hearing Protection on Sound Localization.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Noise-induced hearing loss and its prevention: Integration of data from animal models and human clinical trials.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019Review
- Localization of Vehicle Back-Up Alarms by Users of Level-Dependent Hearing Protectors under Industrial Noise Conditions Generated at a Forge.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Autonomic responses to blast overpressure can be elicited by exclusively exposing the ear in rats.Journal of otology · 2018Article
- The Indecision Model of Psychophysical Performance in Dual-Presentation Tasks: Parameter Estimation and Comparative Analysis of Response Formats.Frontiers in psychology · 2017Article
- The Effect of Sound Localization on Auditory-Only and Audiovisual Speech Recognition in a Simulated Multitalker Environment.Trends in hearingArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Hearing protection devices (HPDs) such as earplugs offer to mitigate noise exposure and reduce the incidence of hearing loss among persons frequently exposed to intense sound. However, distortions of spatial acoustic information and reduced audibility of low-intensity sounds caused by many existing HPDs can make their use untenable in high-risk (e.g., military or law enforcement) environments where auditory situational awareness is imperative. Here we assessed (1) sound source localization accuracy using a head-turning paradigm, (2) speech-in-noise recognition using a modified version of the QuickSIN test, and (3) tone detection thresholds using a two-alternative forced-choice task. Subjects were 10 young normal-hearing males. Four different HPDs were tested (two active, two passive), including two new and previously untested devices. Relative to unoccluded (control) performance, all tested HPDs significantly degraded performance across tasks, although one active HPD slightly improved high-frequency tone detection thresholds and did not degrade speech recognition. Behavioral data were examined with respect to head-related transfer functions measured using a binaural manikin with and without tested HPDs in place. Data reinforce previous reports that HPDs significantly compromise a variety of auditory perceptual facilities, particularly sound localization due to distortions of high-frequency spectral cues that are important for the avoidance of front-back confusions.
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.