Trial reportInternational journal of audiology2018
Hearing aid fitting and developmental outcomes of children fit according to either the NAL or DSL prescription: fit-to-target, audibility, speech and language abilities.
Trial report in International journal of audiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Speech Discrimination in Infancy Predicts Language Outcomes at 30 Months for Both Children with Normal Hearing and Those with Hearing Differences.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Early Cognitive Predictors of 9-Year-Old Spoken Language in Children With Mild to Severe Hearing Loss Using Hearing Aids.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
- Factors influencing speech perception in noise for 5-year-old children using hearing aids or cochlear implants.International journal of audiology · 2018Article
- Spoken language and everyday functioning in 5-year-old children using hearing aids or cochlear implants.International journal of audiology · 2018Article
- Learning from the Longitudinal Outcomes of Children with Hearing Impairment (LOCHI) study: summary of 5-year findings and implications.International journal of audiology · 2018Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study examined the influence of prescription on hearing aid (HA) fitting characteristics and 5-year developmental outcomes of children.
designA randomised controlled trial implemented as part of a population-based study on Longitudinal Outcomes of Children with Hearing Impairment (LOCHI). STUDY SAMPLE: Two-hundred and thirty-two children that were fit according to either the National Acoustic Laboratories (NAL) or Desired Sensation Level (DSL) prescription.
resultsDeviation from targets and root-mean-square error in HA fitting revealed no significant difference between fitting prescriptions. Aided audibility quantified by using the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) model showed that DSL provided higher audibility than NAL at low and medium input levels but not at high input level. After allowing for hearing loss desensitisation, differences in audibility between prescription groups were significant only at low input level. The randomised trial of prescription that was implemented for 163 children revealed no significant between-group differences in speech production, perception, and language; but parent-rated functional performance was higher for the DSL than for the NAL group.
conclusionsProximity to prescriptive targets was similar between fitting prescriptions. The randomised trial revealed differences in aided audibility at low input level between prescription groups, but no significant differences in speech and language abilities.
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.