ArticleTrends in hearing
Predictors of Hearing-Aid Outcomes.
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Relationships Between Auditory Processing and Cognitive Abilities in Adults: A Systematic Review.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2024Pooled it
- The Association Between the Processing of Binaural Temporal-Fine-Structure Information and Audiometric Threshold and Age: A Meta-Analysis.Trends in hearingPooled it
- Transcutaneous Cervical Vagus Nerve Stimulation Improves Speech Comprehension in Noise: A Crossover, Placebo-Controlled Study.Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Initial High-Frequency Amplification Accuracy Predicts Long-Term Hearing Aid Fitting Outcomes: A Real Ear Measurement-Based Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Individual differences in hearing decline predict region-specific brain and cognitive changes in healthy aging men.Frontiers in aging · 2026Article
- Spectro-temporal vs. spectral features to predict the lombard gain in Mandarin Chinese.PloS one · 2026Article
- Transcutaneous cervical vagus nerve stimulation improves speech comprehension in noise: A crossover, placebo-controlled study.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Protective effects of indole-3-propionic acid against TCP-induced hearing loss in mice by mitigating oxidative stress and promoting neutrophil recruitment.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Novel Hybrid Solution for Hearing Impairments.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Prediction of hearing aid cognitive outcomes in age-related hearing loss.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- Impaired noise adaptation contributes to speech intelligibility problems in people with hearing loss.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Increased reliance on temporal coding when target sound is softer than the background.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Auditory Profile-Based Hearing Aid Fitting: Self-Reported Benefit for First-Time Hearing Aid Users.Audiology research · 2024Article
- Reference Data for a Quick Speech-in-Noise Hearing Test in the French Language.Audiology & neuro-otology · 2024Article
- Potential barriers to the daily use of hearing aids in children.Saudi medical journal · 2023Article
- Predictable Factors of People with Asymmetrical Hearing Loss Wearing a Hearing Aid in the Worse Ear Only.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Experienced hearing aid users' perspectives of assessment and communication within audiology: a qualitative study using digital methods.International journal of audiology · 2022Article
- Anatomical and audiological considerations in branchiootorenal syndrome: A systematic review.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2022Review
- Hearing Therapy Improves Tinnitus-Related Distress in Mildly Distressed Patients with Chronic Tinnitus and Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss: A Randomized-Controlled Cross-Over Design.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over 360 million people worldwide suffer from disabling hearing loss. Most of them can be treated with hearing aids. Unfortunately, performance with hearing aids and the benefit obtained from using them vary widely across users. Here, we investigate the reasons for such variability. Sixty-eight hearing-aid users or candidates were fitted bilaterally with nonlinear hearing aids using standard procedures. Treatment outcome was assessed by measuring aided speech intelligibility in a time-reversed two-talker background and self-reported improvement in hearing ability. Statistical predictive models of these outcomes were obtained using linear combinations of 19 predictors, including demographic and audiological data, indicators of cochlear mechanical dysfunction and auditory temporal processing skills, hearing-aid settings, working memory capacity, and pretreatment self-perceived hearing ability. Aided intelligibility tended to be better for younger hearing-aid users with good unaided intelligibility in quiet and with good temporal processing abilities. Intelligibility tended to improve by increasing amplification for low-intensity sounds and by using more linear amplification for high-intensity sounds. Self-reported improvement in hearing ability was hard to predict but tended to be smaller for users with better working memory capacity. Indicators of cochlear mechanical dysfunction, alone or in combination with hearing settings, did not affect outcome predictions. The results may be useful for improving hearing aids and setting patients' expectations.
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.