Trial reportScientific reports2019
Electro-haptic enhancement of speech-in-noise performance in cochlear implant users.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- Haptic sound-localisation for use in cochlear implant and hearing-aid users.Scientific reports · 2020Trial
- Spectral peak picking improves tactile speech perception.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Auditory and vibrotactile interactions in perception of timbre acoustic features.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Vibrotactile speech cues are associated with enhanced auditory processing in middle and superior temporal gyri.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Exposure to vibrotactile music improves audiometric performances in individuals with cochlear implants.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- User-Centered Design of Neuroprosthetics: Advancements and Limitations.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2025Review
- Resting-state functional connectivity changes following audio-tactile speech training.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Sensory-substitution based sound perception using a spinal computer-brain interface.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Highly compromised auditory spatial perception in aided congenitally hearing-impaired and rapid improvement with tactile technology.iScience · 2024Article
- Improved tactile speech perception and noise robustness using audio-to-tactile sensory substitution with amplitude envelope expansion.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Localizing 3D motion through the fingertips: Following in the footsteps of elephants.iScience · 2024Article
- Improved tactile speech robustness to background noise with a dual-path recurrent neural network noise-reduction method.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Improved tactile speech perception using audio-to-tactile sensory substitution with formant frequency focusing.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Improved speech intelligibility in the presence of congruent vibrotactile speech input.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Speech-derived haptic stimulation enhances speech recognition in a multi-talker background.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Improving speech perception for hearing-impaired listeners using audio-to-tactile sensory substitution with multiple frequency channels.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Electro-vibrational stimulation results in improved speech perception in noise for cochlear implant users with bilateral residual hearing.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Improving disease prevention, diagnosis, and treatment using novel bionic technologies.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2023Review
- Multisensory and lexical information in speech perception.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Sensitivity to Haptic Sound-Localization Cues at Different Body Locations.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cochlear implant (CI) users receive only limited sound information through their implant, which means that they struggle to understand speech in noisy environments. Recent work has suggested that combining the electrical signal from the CI with a haptic signal that provides crucial missing sound information ("electro-haptic stimulation"; EHS) could improve speech-in-noise performance. The aim of the current study was to test whether EHS could enhance speech-in-noise performance in CI users using: (1) a tactile signal derived using an algorithm that could be applied in real time, (2) a stimulation site appropriate for a real-world application, and (3) a tactile signal that could readily be produced by a compact, portable device. We measured speech intelligibility in multi-talker noise with and without vibro-tactile stimulation of the wrist in CI users, before and after a short training regime. No effect of EHS was found before training, but after training EHS was found to improve the number of words correctly identified by an average of 8.3%-points, with some users improving by more than 20%-points. Our approach could offer an inexpensive and non-invasive means of improving speech-in-noise performance in CI users.
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.