ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Audiology2017
Perceptual Implications of Level- and Frequency-Specific Deviations from Hearing Aid Prescription in Children.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- American Cochlear Implant Alliance Position Statement on Newborn Congenital Cytomegalovirus Screening.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Guideline
- The Speech Intelligibility Index: Tutorial and Applications for Children Who Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing.American journal of audiology · 2025Article
- Comparing criteria for deviation from hearing aid prescriptive targets in children.International journal of audiology · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Predicting Hearing aid Benefit Using Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses in Children With Hearing Loss.Trends in hearingArticle
- Comparison of auditory brainstem response and auditory steady state response audiometry by evaluating the hearing thresholds obtained in children with different severity of hearing loss.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of providing amplification for children with hearing loss is to make speech audible across a range of frequencies and intensities. Children with hearing aids (HAs) that closely approximate prescriptive targets have better audibility than peers with HA output below prescriptive targets. Poor aided audibility puts children with hearing loss at risk for delays in communication, social, and academic development. PURPOSE: The goals of this study were to determine how well HAs match prescriptive targets across ranges of frequency and intensity of speech and to determine how level- and frequency-dependent deviations from prescriptive target affect speech recognition in quiet and in background noise. STUDY SAMPLE: One-hundred sixty-six children with permanent mild to severe hearing loss who were between 6 months and 8 years of age and who wore HAs participated in the study. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Hearing aid verification and speech recognition data were collected as part of a longitudinal study of communication development in children with HAs. Hearing aid output at levels of soft and average speech and maximum power output were compared with each child's prescriptive targets. The deviations from prescriptive target were quantified based on the root-mean-square (RMS) error and absolute deviation from target for octave frequencies. Children were classified into groups based on the number of level-dependent deviations from prescriptive target. Frequency-specific deviations from prescriptive target and sensation levels (SLs) were used to estimate the proximity of fittings across the frequency range. Lexical Neighborhood Test (LNT) word recognition in quiet and Computer-Assisted Speech Perception Assessment (CASPA) phoneme recognition in noise were compared across level-dependent error groups and as a function of SL at 4 kHz.
resultsChildren who had deviations from prescriptive target at all three input levels had poorer LNT word recognition in quiet than children who had fittings that matched prescriptive target within 5 dB RMS at all three input levels. Children with lower 4 kHz SLs through their HAs had poorer LNT recognition in quiet and CASPA phoneme recognition in noise than children with higher aided SLs.
conclusionsChildren with HAs fitted to provide audibility for speech across a range of inputs and frequencies had better speech recognition outcomes than peers with HAs that were not optimally fitted to prescriptive targets.
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.