Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30803386›Full record

ArticleTrends in hearing

Comparison of Frequency Transposition and Frequency Compression for People With Extensive Dead Regions in the Cochlea.

Marina Salorio-Corbetto, Thomas Baer, Brian C J Moore

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04145661 (A Comparison of Conventional Hearing Aid Processing), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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.

NCT04145661 nacompletednot on this map

A Comparison of Conventional Hearing Aid Processing (CP) and Non-linear Frequency Compression (NLFC) Processing in Adult Patients With and Without Cochlear Dead Regions Who Have a Moderate to Severe Sensorineural Hearing Loss.

TypeinterventionalSponsorManchester University NHS Foundation TrustRan2019 to 2020Enrolled11ConditionsSensorineural Hearing Loss, Bilateral, Cochlear Hearing LossArmsHearing aids programmed conventionally., Hearing aids programmed with compression activated.
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marina Salorio-Corbetto1 Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5621-5284
Thomas Baer1 Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, UK.
Brian C J Moore1 Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Cambridge, UK.
University of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G8717539
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective was to determine the effects of two frequency-lowering algorithms (frequency transposition, FT, and frequency compression, FC) on audibility, speech identification, and subjective benefit, for people with high-frequency hearing loss and extensive dead regions (DRs) in the cochlea. A single-blind randomized crossover design was used. FT and FC were compared with each other and with a control condition (denoted 'Control') without frequency lowering, using hearing aids that were otherwise identical. Data were collected after at least 6 weeks of experience with a condition. Outcome measures were audibility, scores for consonant identification, scores for word-final /s, z/ detection ( S test), sentence-in-noise intelligibility, and a questionnaire assessing self-perceived benefit (Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale). Ten adults with steeply sloping high-frequency hearing loss and extensive DRs were tested. FT and FC improved the audibility of some high-frequency sounds for 7 and 9 participants out of 10, respectively. At the group level, performance for FT and FC did not differ significantly from that for Control for any of the outcome measures. However, the pattern of consonant confusions varied across conditions. Bayesian analysis of the confusion matrices revealed a trend for FT to lead to more consistent error patterns than FC and Control. Thus, FT may have the potential to give greater benefit than Control or FC following extended experience or training.

Indexed as

HearingSpeech PerceptionAgedAlgorithmsBayes TheoremCochleaFemaleHearing AidsHearing Loss, High-FrequencyHumansMaleMiddle AgedNoiseRandom AllocationSingle-Blind Methoddead regionsfrequency compressionfrequency loweringfrequency transpositionhearing aids

Identifiers

PMID30803386
PMCPMC6330725
OpenAlexW2909790636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.