ArticleJournal of audiology & otology2020
Better Understanding of Direct Bone-Conduction Measurement: Comparison with Frequency-Specific Bone-Conduction Tones and Brainstem Responses.
Article in Journal of audiology & otology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bone Conduction Threshold Measurements in Patients with Bone Conduction Devices: A Comparison of Available Methods.The journal of international advanced otology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe present study aimed to compare thresholds of direct bone-conduction (BC direct) with those of behaviorally measured BC pure-tone audiometry (PTA) and objectively measured BC auditory brainstem response (ABR) to confirm the clinical feasibility of their relationships. Subjects and.
methodsYoung adults with normal hearing participated in the study to determine the thresholds from three measurements at four testing frequencies. In the BC direct, the vibrator of a bone-anchored hearing aid softband was placed on the right mastoid of each subject. In both PTA and ABR, a B71 bone oscillator was placed on the subject's right mastoid. While the subject's thresholds of BC direct and BC PTA were determined with a clinically routine 5-dB step procedure, BC ABR was conducted to determine the individual's hearing sensitivity by a peak V of the waveform using tone-burst and click stimuli.
resultsThe BC direct showed a different pattern between low and high frequencies. Precisely, its thresholds were 13.25 and 12.25 dB HL at 0.5 and 1 kHz, respectively, but 19 and 19.75 dB HL at 2 and 4 kHz, respectively. A significant positive correlation existed between BC direct and PTA at 1 kHz, which was also correlated with ABR.
conclusionsBased on the current data, the thresholds of BC direct were similar to BC PTA at low frequencies and BC ABR at high frequencies. The thresholds of BC direct might be predictable at approximately 5 dB higher (or lower) than that in PTA, although a large data set is required for standardization.
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.