ArticleTrends in hearing
Spatial Speech-in-Noise Performance in Bimodal and Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users.
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Closedness of Acoustic Coupling and Audiological Measures Are Associated with Individual Speech-in-Noise Benefit From Noise Reduction in Hearing Aids.Trends in hearingTrial
- Cochlear Implantation in Cases of Asymmetric Hearing Loss: Subjective Benefit, Word Recognition, and Spatial Hearing.Trends in hearingTrial
- Incomplete binaural restoration in single-sided deafness treated with cochlear implants: insights from compensatory head-orienting behaviors.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Neural alpha oscillations and auditory steady-state responses during adaptation to a cochlear implant.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- Predictors of cochlear implant outcomes in pediatric auditory neuropathy: A matched case-control study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Cortical mechanisms of across-ear speech integration investigated using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS).PloS one · 2024Article
- How Can We Compare Cochlear Implant Systems across Manufacturers? A Scoping Review of Recent Literature.Audiology research · 2023Article
- Importance of ipsilateral residual hearing for spatial hearing by bimodal cochlear implant users.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Event-Related Potentials of Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users: Using a Semantic Oddball Paradigm in Noise.Audiology & neuro-otology · 2023Article
- Modelling speech reception thresholds and their improvements due to spatial noise reduction algorithms in bimodal cochlear implant users.Hearing research · 2022Article
- Frequency Fitting Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithm in Cochlear Implant Users with Bimodal Binaural Hearing.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Electrophysiological differences and similarities in audiovisual speech processing in CI users with unilateral and bilateral hearing loss.Current research in neurobiology · 2022Article
- Spatial Release From Informational and Energetic Masking in Bimodal and Bilateral Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2020Article
- Sensitivity to binaural temporal-envelope beats with single-sided deafness and a cochlear implant as a measure of tonotopic match (L).The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2020Article
- Improved binaural speech reception thresholds through small symmetrical separation of speech and noise.PloS one · 2020Article
- Effect of (Mis)Matched Compression Speed on Speech Recognition in Bimodal Listeners.Trends in hearingArticle
- Speech Intelligibility and Spatial Release From Masking Improvements Using Spatial Noise Reduction Algorithms in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users.Trends in hearingArticle
- Article
- Article
- Measuring and Modeling Cue Dependent Spatial Release from Masking in the Presence of Typical Delays in the Treatment of Hearing Loss.Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compared spatial speech-in-noise performance in two cochlear implant (CI) patient groups: bimodal listeners, who use a hearing aid contralaterally to support their impaired acoustic hearing, and listeners with contralateral normal hearing, i.e., who were single-sided deaf before implantation. Using a laboratory setting that controls for head movements and that simulates spatial acoustic scenes, speech reception thresholds were measured for frontal speech-in-stationary noise from the front, the left, or the right side. Spatial release from masking (SRM) was then extracted from speech reception thresholds for monaural and binaural listening. SRM was found to be significantly lower in bimodal CI than in CI single-sided deaf listeners. Within each listener group, the SRM extracted from monaural listening did not differ from the SRM extracted from binaural listening. In contrast, a normal-hearing control group showed a significant improvement in SRM when using two ears in comparison to one. Neither CI group showed a binaural summation effect; that is, their performance was not improved by using two devices instead of the best monaural device in each spatial scenario. The results confirm a "listening with the better ear" strategy in the two CI patient groups, where patients benefited from using two ears/devices instead of one by selectively attending to the better one. Which one is the better ear, however, depends on the spatial scenario and on the individual configuration of hearing loss.
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.