Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31267958›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Audiology2020

Interactions Between Digital Noise Reduction and Reverberation: Acoustic and Behavioral Effects.

Paul Reinhart, Pavel Zahorik, Pamela Souza

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 60% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Paul ReinhartDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
Pavel ZahorikDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY.
Pamela SouzaDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
Northwestern University · USUniversity of Louisville · US

Funding

Acoustic and Perceptual Effects of WDRC AmplificationR01DC006014 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI SOUZA, PAMELA E. · 2005 to 2020
$3.9M
Perceptual processing of indirect soundR01DC008168 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE · PI ZAHORIK, PAVEL A · 2007 to 2011
$1.4M
Individual Differences with WDRC Amplification in Challenging EnvironmentsF31DC015373 · NIDCD · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY · PI REINHART, PAUL NICHOLAS · 2016 to 2016
$37k
NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC015373NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC006014NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC008168
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital noise reduction (DNR) processing is used in hearing aids to enhance perception in noise by classifying and suppressing the noise acoustics. However, the efficacy of DNR processing is not known under reverberant conditions where the speech-in-noise acoustics are further degraded by reverberation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate acoustic and perceptual effects of DNR processing across a range of reverberant conditions for individuals with hearing impairment. RESEARCH

designThis study used an experimental design to investigate the effects of varying reverberation on speech-in-noise processed with DNR. STUDY SAMPLE: Twenty-six listeners with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing impairment participated in the study. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Speech stimuli were combined with unmodulated broadband noise at several signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). A range of reverberant conditions with realistic parameters were simulated, as well as an anechoic control condition without reverberation. Reverberant speech-in-noise signals were processed using a spectral subtraction DNR simulation. Signals were acoustically analyzed using a phase inversion technique to quantify improvement in SNR as a result of DNR processing. Sentence intelligibility and subjective ratings of listening effort, speech naturalness, and background noise comfort were examined with and without DNR processing across the conditions.

resultsImprovement in SNR was greatest in the anechoic control condition and decreased as the ratio of direct to reverberant energy decreased. There was no significant effect of DNR processing on speech intelligibility in the anechoic control condition, but there was a significant decrease in speech intelligibility with DNR processing in all of the reverberant conditions. Subjectively, listeners reported greater listening effort and lower speech naturalness with DNR processing in some of the reverberant conditions. Listeners reported higher background noise comfort with DNR processing only in the anechoic control condition.

conclusionsResults suggest that reverberation affects DNR processing using a spectral subtraction algorithm in such a way that decreases the ability of DNR to reduce noise without distorting the speech acoustics. Overall, DNR processing may be most beneficial in environments with little reverberation and that the use of DNR processing in highly reverberant environments may actually produce adverse perceptual effects. Further research is warranted using commercial hearing aids in realistic reverberant environments.

Indexed as

Hearing AidsNoiseSignal-To-Noise RatioSpeech PerceptionAgedAged, 80 and overAnalysis of VarianceFemaleHearing Loss, SensorineuralHumansMaleSpeech Acoustics

Identifiers

PMID31267958
PMCPMC7416503
OpenAlexW2954844056

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.