Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33905446›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

A self-training program for sensory substitution devices.

Galit Buchs, Benedetta Haimler, Menachem Kerem, Shachar Maidenbaum, Liraz Braun, Amir Amedi

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Galit BuchsThe Baruch Ivcher Institute For Brain, Cognition & Technology, The Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzeliya, Israel.ORCID 0000-0001-8311-3067
Benedetta HaimlerThe Baruch Ivcher Institute For Brain, Cognition & Technology, The Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzeliya, Israel.
Menachem KeremThe Baruch Ivcher Institute For Brain, Cognition & Technology, The Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzeliya, Israel.
Shachar MaidenbaumThe Baruch Ivcher Institute For Brain, Cognition & Technology, The Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzeliya, Israel.
Liraz BraunThe Baruch Ivcher Institute For Brain, Cognition & Technology, The Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzeliya, Israel.
Amir AmediThe Baruch Ivcher Institute For Brain, Cognition & Technology, The Baruch Ivcher School of Psychology, Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzeliya, Israel.
Reichman University · ILBen-Gurion University of the Negev · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sensory Substitution Devices (SSDs) convey visual information through audition or touch, targeting blind and visually impaired individuals. One bottleneck towards adopting SSDs in everyday life by blind users, is the constant dependency on sighted instructors throughout the learning process. Here, we present a proof-of-concept for the efficacy of an online self-training program developed for learning the basics of the EyeMusic visual-to-auditory SSD tested on sighted blindfolded participants. Additionally, aiming to identify the best training strategy to be later re-adapted for the blind, we compared multisensory vs. unisensory as well as perceptual vs. descriptive feedback approaches. To these aims, sighted participants performed identical SSD-stimuli identification tests before and after ~75 minutes of self-training on the EyeMusic algorithm. Participants were divided into five groups, differing by the feedback delivered during training: auditory-descriptive, audio-visual textual description, audio-visual perceptual simultaneous and interleaved, and a control group which had no training. At baseline, before any EyeMusic training, participants SSD objects' identification was significantly above chance, highlighting the algorithm's intuitiveness. Furthermore, self-training led to a significant improvement in accuracy between pre- and post-training tests in each of the four feedback groups versus control, though no significant difference emerged among those groups. Nonetheless, significant correlations between individual post-training success rates and various learning measures acquired during training, suggest a trend for an advantage of multisensory vs. unisensory feedback strategies, while no trend emerged for perceptual vs. descriptive strategies. The success at baseline strengthens the conclusion that cross-modal correspondences facilitate learning, given SSD algorithms are based on such correspondences. Additionally, and crucially, the results highlight the feasibility of self-training for the first stages of SSD learning, and suggest that for these initial stages, unisensory training, easily implemented also for blind and visually impaired individuals, may suffice. Together, these findings will potentially boost the use of SSDs for rehabilitation.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsSensory AidsWearable Electronic DevicesAcoustic StimulationAdultAuditory PerceptionBiofeedback, PsychologyFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansLearningMalePersons with Visual DisabilitiesTouch Perception

Identifiers

PMID33905446
PMCPMC8078811
OpenAlexW3157546884

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.