ReviewHNO2020
[Speech comprehension and cognitive performance in acoustically difficult situations].
Review in HNO, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- [In adaptive measurement: Shortened Freiburg monosyllabic test vs. Oldenburg sentence test in noise].Laryngo- rhino- otologie · 2025Article
- Management of Audiological Disorders in Cochlear Implants: Outcomes in Demanding Listening Situations and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Factors to Describe the Outcome Characteristics of a CI Recipient.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Enhancing Cochlear Implant Outcomes across Age Groups: The Interplay of Forward Focus and Advanced Combination Encoder Coding Strategies in Noisy Conditions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Extended Preoperative Audiometry for Outcome Prediction and Risk Analysis in Patients Receiving Cochlear Implants.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding speech strongly depends on sensory processes (bottom-up); however, especially in acoustically difficult situations, cognitive processes (top-down), such as attention and working memory also play a role. In older people both hearing and certain cognitive abilities typically decrease. This has consequences for everyday communication. In clinical practice it is relevant to improve the audibility of speech through appropriate rehabilitative measures and at the same time to reduce the cognitive burden during understanding speech. In this context, future audiometric methods will have to consider "listening effort" as an expression of cognitive load in addition to the improvement of speech intelligibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31440774What 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.