ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Audiology2017
Listening Effort and Speech Recognition with Frequency Compression Amplification for Children and Adults with Hearing Loss.
Article in Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding Variability in Individual Response to Hearing Aid Signal Processing in Wearable Hearing Aids.Ear and hearingTrial
- Recognition of Emotional Prosody in Mandarin-Speaking Children: Effects of Age, Noise, and Working Memory.Journal of psycholinguistic research · 2024Article
- The Influence of the Stimulus Level Used to Prescribe Nonlinear Frequency Compression on Speech Perception.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2024Article
- Test-Retest Reliability and the Role of Task Instructions when Measuring Listening Effort Using a Verbal Response Time Paradigm.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Speech Understanding in Complex Environments by School-Age Children with Mild Bilateral or Unilateral Hearing Loss.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- A review of auditory processing and cognitive change during normal ageing, and the implications for setting hearing aids for older adults.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
- Influence of aided audibility on speech recognition performance with frequency composition for children and adults.International journal of audiology · 2021Article
- Audibility and Spectral-Ripple Discrimination Thresholds as Predictors of Word Recognition with Nonlinear Frequency Compression.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2021Article
- Effects of Adaptive Non-linear Frequency Compression in Hearing Aids on Mandarin Speech and Sound-Quality Perception.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNonlinear frequency compression (NFC) can improve the audibility of high-frequency sounds by lowering them to a frequency where audibility is better; however, this lowering results in spectral distortion. Consequently, performance is a combination of the effects of increased access to high-frequency sounds and the detrimental effects of spectral distortion. Previous work has demonstrated positive benefits of NFC on speech recognition when NFC is set to improve audibility while minimizing distortion. However, the extent to which NFC impacts listening effort is not well understood, especially for children with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). PURPOSE: To examine the impact of NFC on recognition and listening effort for speech in adults and children with SNHL. RESEARCH
designWithin-subject, quasi-experimental study. Participants listened to amplified nonsense words that were (1) frequency-lowered using NFC, (2) low-pass filtered at 5 kHz to simulate the restricted bandwidth (RBW) of conventional hearing aid processing, or (3) low-pass filtered at 10 kHz to simulate extended bandwidth (EBW) amplification. STUDY SAMPLE: Fourteen children (8-16 yr) and 14 adults (19-65 yr) with mild-to-severe SNHL.
interventionParticipants listened to speech processed by a hearing aid simulator that amplified input signals to fit a prescriptive target fitting procedure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Participants were blinded to the type of processing. Participants' responses to each nonsense word were analyzed for accuracy and verbal-response time (VRT; listening effort). A multivariate analysis of variance and linear mixed model were used to determine the effect of hearing-aid signal processing on nonsense word recognition and VRT.
resultsBoth children and adults identified the nonsense words and initial consonants better with EBW and NFC than with RBW. The type of processing did not affect the identification of the vowels or final consonants. There was no effect of age on recognition of the nonsense words, initial consonants, medial vowels, or final consonants. VRT did not change significantly with the type of processing or age.
conclusionBoth adults and children demonstrated improved speech recognition with access to the high-frequency sounds in speech. Listening effort as measured by VRT was not affected by access to high-frequency sounds.
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.