Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31472530›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2019

A comparison of ear-canal-reflectance measurement methods in an ear simulator.

Kren Rahbek Nørgaard, Karolina K Charaziak, Christopher A Shera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Wideband acoustic immittance: Suitable quantities for assessing middle-ear status.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Kren Rahbek NørgaardAcoustic Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Ørsteds Plads, Building 352, Kongens Lyngby, DK-2800, Denmark.
Karolina K CharaziakCaruso Department of Otolaryngology, University of Southern California, 1640 Marengo Street, Los Angeles, California 90033, USA.
Christopher A SheraCaruso Department of Otolaryngology, University of Southern California, 1640 Marengo Street, Los Angeles, California 90033, USA.

Funding

UNDERSTANDING OTOACOUSTIC EMISSIONSR01DC003687 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Christopher A Shera · 1999 to 2026
$9.8M
Understanding the dynamics of cochlear amplificationK99DC016906 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI CHARAZIAK, KAROLINA · 2019 to 2020
$303k
NIDCD NIH HHS K99 DC016906NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC003687
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ear-canal reflectance has been researched extensively for diagnosing conductive hearing disorders and compensating for the ear-canal acoustics in non-invasive measurements of the auditory system. Little emphasis, however, has been placed on assessing measurement accuracy and variability. In this paper, a number of ear-canal-reflectance measurement methods reported in the literature are utilized and compared. Measurement variation seems to arise chiefly from three factors: the residual ear-canal length, the ear-probe insertion angle, and the measurement frequency bandwidth. Calculation of the ear-canal reflectance from the measured ear-canal impedance requires estimating the ear-canal characteristic impedance in situ. The variability in ear-canal estimated characteristic impedance and reflectance due to these principal factors is assessed in an idealized controlled setup using a uniform occluded-ear simulator. In addition, the influence of this measurement variability on reflectance-based methods for calibrating stimulus levels is evaluated and, by operating the condenser microphone of the occluded-ear simulator as an electro-static speaker, the variability in estimating the emitted pressure from the ear is determined. The various measurement methods differ widely in their robustness to variations in the three principal factors influencing the accuracy and variability of ear-canal reflectance.

Indexed as

Acoustic Impedance TestsAcoustic StimulationAuditory ThresholdCalibrationEar CanalHumansModels, TheoreticalReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySound

Identifiers

PMID31472530
PMCPMC6707811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.