Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29800361›Full record

ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2018

Speech Understanding in Noise for Adults With Cochlear Implants: Effects of Hearing Configuration, Source Location Certainty, and Head Movement.

René H Gifford, Louise Loiselle, Sarah Natale, Sterling W Sheffield, Linsey W Sunderhaus, Mary S Dietrich, Michael F Dorman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Tonotopic versus conventional frequency mapping in adult cochlear implant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors.

René H GiffordVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
Louise LoiselleArizona State University, Tempe, AZ.
Sarah NataleArizona State University, Tempe, AZ.
Sterling W SheffieldWalter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD.
Linsey W SunderhausVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
Mary S DietrichVanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
Michael F DormanArizona State University, Tempe, AZ.

Funding

Research Project: Sensory and Multisensory Contributions to AutismU54HD083211 · NICHD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI DYKENS, ELISABETH MAY · 2015 to 2019
$7.1M
Cochlear Implants: Combined Electric and Binaural Acoustic StimulationR01DC009404 · NIDCD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI GIFFORD, RENE H · 2010 to 2019
$3.4M
Cochlear Implant performance in Realistic Listening EnvironmentsR01DC010821 · NIDCD · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI DORMAN, MICHAEL F., GIFFORD, RENE H · 2010 to 2014
$1.6M
NICHD NIH HHS U54 HD083211NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC009404NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC010821
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The primary purpose of this study was to assess speech understanding in quiet and in diffuse noise for adult cochlear implant (CI) recipients utilizing bimodal hearing or bilateral CIs. Our primary hypothesis was that bilateral CI recipients would demonstrate less effect of source azimuth in the bilateral CI condition due to symmetric interaural head shadow. Method: Sentence recognition was assessed for adult bilateral (n = 25) CI users and bimodal listeners (n = 12) in three conditions: (1) source location certainty regarding fixed target azimuth, (2) source location uncertainty regarding roving target azimuth, and (3) Condition 2 repeated, allowing listeners to turn their heads, as needed. Results: (a) Bilateral CI users exhibited relatively similar performance regardless of source azimuth in the bilateral CI condition; (b) bimodal listeners exhibited higher performance for speech directed to the better hearing ear even in the bimodal condition; (c) the unilateral, better ear condition yielded higher performance for speech presented to the better ear versus speech to the front or to the poorer ear; (d) source location certainty did not affect speech understanding performance; and (e) head turns did not improve performance. The results confirmed our hypothesis that bilateral CI users exhibited less effect of source azimuth than bimodal listeners. That is, they exhibited similar performance for speech recognition irrespective of source azimuth, whereas bimodal listeners exhibited significantly poorer performance with speech originating from the poorer hearing ear (typically the nonimplanted ear). Conclusions: Bilateral CI users overcame ear and source location effects observed for the bimodal listeners. Bilateral CI users have access to head shadow on both sides, whereas bimodal listeners generally have interaural asymmetry in both speech understanding and audible bandwidth limiting the head shadow benefit obtained from the poorer ear (generally the nonimplanted ear). In summary, we found that, in conditions with source location uncertainty and increased ecological validity, bilateral CI performance was superior to bimodal listening.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantsComprehensionHead MovementsSpeech PerceptionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHearing LossHumansMaleMiddle AgedNoisePsychoacousticsSound LocalizationUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID29800361
PMCPMC6195075

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.