Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27742880›Full record

ArticleTrends in hearing2016

Aging and Spectro-Temporal Integration of Speech.

John H Grose, Heather L Porter, Emily Buss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trends in hearing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

John H GroseDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA john_grose@med.unc.edu.
Heather L PorterHearing and Speech Department, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Emily BussDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

COMPLEX SOUND ANALYSIS IN NORMAL AND IMPAIRED LISTENERSR01DC001507 · NIDCD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI GROSE, JOHN H · 1993 to 2017
$5.0M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC001507
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of age on the spectro-temporal integration of speech. The hypothesis was that the integration of speech fragments distributed over frequency, time, and ear of presentation is reduced in older listeners-even for those with good audiometric hearing. Younger, middle-aged, and older listeners (10 per group) with good audiometric hearing participated. They were each tested under seven conditions that encompassed combinations of spectral, temporal, and binaural integration. Sentences were filtered into two bands centered at 500 Hz and 2500 Hz, with criterion bandwidth tailored for each participant. In some conditions, the speech bands were individually square wave interrupted at a rate of 10 Hz. Configurations of uninterrupted, synchronously interrupted, and asynchronously interrupted frequency bands were constructed that constituted speech fragments distributed across frequency, time, and ear of presentation. The over-arching finding was that, for most configurations, performance was not differentially affected by listener age. Although speech intelligibility varied across condition, there was no evidence of performance deficits in older listeners in any condition. This study indicates that age, per se, does not necessarily undermine the ability to integrate fragments of speech dispersed across frequency and time.

Indexed as

AgingAuditory ThresholdSound SpectrographySpeech PerceptionAdultAgedFemaleHearingHumansMaleMiddle AgedSpeech IntelligibilityYoung Adultagingauditory integrationspectro-temporal processingspeech perception

Identifiers

PMID27742880
PMCPMC5068923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.