Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33197359›Full record

ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2020

Comparing Speech Recognition for Listeners With Normal and Impaired Hearing: Simulations for Controlling Differences in Speech Levels and Spectral Shape.

Daniel Fogerty, Rachel Madorskiy, Jayne B Ahlstrom, Judy R Dubno

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel FogertyDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of South Carolina, Columbia.
Rachel MadorskiyDepartment of Speech, Language, Hearing, and Occupational Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula.
Jayne B AhlstromDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Judy R DubnoDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Google (United States) · US

Funding

South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute (SCTR)UL1TR001450 · NCATS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T., FLUME, PATRICK A · 2015 to 2024
$41.1M
AUDITORY ANALYSIS AND SPEECH RECOGNITIONR01DC000184 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI DUBNO, JUDY R · 1989 to 2016
$5.1M
Maximizing speech recognition under adverse listening conditionsR01DC015465 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA AT COLUMBIA · PI FOGERTY, DANIEL · 2016 to 2020
$1.6M
RENOVATION TO SUPPORT SENSORY NEUROSCIENCE RESEARCHC06RR014516 · NCRR · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI RAYMOND, JOHN R · 1999 to 1999
–
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001450NCRR NIH HHS C06 RR014516NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC000184NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC015465
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose This study investigated methods used to simulate factors associated with reduced audibility, increased speech levels, and spectral shaping for aided older adults with hearing loss. Simulations provided to younger normal-hearing adults were used to investigate the effect of sensation level, speech presentation level, and spectral shape in comparison to older adults with hearing loss. Method Measures were assessed in quiet, steady-state noise, and speech-modulated noise. Older adults with hearing loss listened to speech that was spectrally shaped according to their hearing thresholds. Younger adults with normal hearing listened to speech that simulated the hearing-impaired group's (a) reduced audibility, (b) increased speech levels, and (c) spectral shaping. Group comparisons were made based on speech recognition performance and masking release. Additionally, younger adults completed measures of listening effort and perceived speech quality to assess if differences across simulations in these outcome measures were similar to those for speech recognition. Results Across the various simulations employed, testing in the presence of a threshold matching noise best matched differences in speech recognition and masking release between younger and older adults. This result remained consistent across the other two outcome measures. Conclusions A combination of audibility, speech level, and spectral shape factors is required to simulate differences between listeners with normal and impaired hearing in recognition, listening effort, and perceived speech quality. The use of spectrally shaped and amplified speech in the presence of threshold matching noise best provided this simulated control. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13224632.

Indexed as

Hearing Loss, SensorineuralSpeech PerceptionAgedAuditory ThresholdHearingHumansNoisePerceptual MaskingSpeech

Identifiers

PMID33197359
PMCPMC8608154
OpenAlexW3104952749

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.