Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29449017›Full record

ReviewTrends in neurosciences2018

Why Do Hearing Aids Fail to Restore Normal Auditory Perception?

Nicholas A Lesica

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in neurosciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 160 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Impact of hearing aid usage on the quality of life of the older adult in KwaZulu-Natal.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Nicholas A LesicaEar Institute, University College London, London, UK; Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA. Electronic address: n.lesica@ucl.ac.uk.
University of California, Santa Barbara · US

Funding

Wellcome Trust 200942Wellcome Trust 200942/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hearing loss is a widespread condition that is linked to declines in quality of life and mental health. Hearing aids remain the treatment of choice, but, unfortunately, even state-of-the-art devices provide only limited benefit for the perception of speech in noisy environments. While traditionally viewed primarily as a loss of sensitivity, hearing loss is also known to cause complex distortions of sound-evoked neural activity that cannot be corrected by amplification alone. This Opinion article describes the effects of hearing loss on neural activity to illustrate the reasons why current hearing aids are insufficient and to motivate the use of new technologies to explore directions for improving the next generation of devices.

Indexed as

Hearing AidsAcoustic StimulationAnimalsAuditory PerceptionDeafnessHearing LossHumansSpeech Perceptionauditory systemhearing aidshearing lossspeech perception

Identifiers

PMID29449017
PMCPMC7116430
OpenAlexW2787324996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.