ArticleEar and hearing
Novel Approaches to Measure Spatial Release From Masking in Children With Bilateral Cochlear Implants.
Article in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A fast measure of spatial separation for release from masking and its relation to intelligibility.JASA express letters · 2025Article
- A Web-Based Automated Image Processing Research Platform for Cochlear Implantation-Related Studies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Spatial Release From Masking With Bilateral Bone Conduction Stimulation at Mastoid for Normal Hearing Subjects.Trends in hearingArticle
- 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the role of auditory cues for spatial release from masking (SRM) in children with bilateral cochlear implants (BiCIs) and compare their performance with children with normal hearing (NH). To quantify the contribution to speech intelligibility benefits from individual auditory cues: head shadow, binaural redundancy, and interaural differences; as well as from multiple cues: SRM and binaural squelch. To assess SRM using a novel approach of adaptive target-masker angular separation, which provides a more functionally relevant assessment in realistic complex auditory environments.
designChildren fitted with BiCIs (N = 11) and with NH (N = 18) were tested in virtual acoustic space that was simulated using head-related transfer functions measured from individual children with BiCIs behind the ear and from a standard head and torso simulator for all NH children. In experiment I, by comparing speech reception thresholds across 4 test conditions that varied in target-masker spatial separation (colocated versus separated at 180°) and listening conditions (monaural versus binaural/bilateral listening), intelligibility benefits were derived for individual auditory cues for SRM. In experiment II, SRM was quantified using a novel measure to find the minimum angular separation (MAS) between the target and masker to achieve a fixed 20% intelligibility improvement. Target speech was fixed at either +90 or -90° azimuth on the side closer to the better ear (+90° for all NH children) and masker locations were adaptively varied.
resultsIn experiment I, children with BiCIs as a group had smaller intelligibility benefits from head shadow than NH children. No group difference was observed in benefits from binaural redundancy or interaural difference cues. In both groups of children, individuals who gained a larger benefit from interaural differences relied less on monaural head shadow, and vice versa. In experiment II, all children with BiCIs demonstrated measurable MAS thresholds <180° and on average larger than that from NH children. Eight of 11 children with BiCIs and all NH children had a MAS threshold <90°, requiring interaural differences only to gain the target intelligibility benefit; whereas the other 3 children with BiCIs had a MAS between 120° and 137°, requiring monaural head shadow for SRM.
conclusionsWhen target and maskers were separated at 180° on opposing hemifields, children with BiCIs demonstrated greater intelligibility benefits from head shadow and interaural differences than previous literature showed with a smaller separation. Children with BiCIs demonstrated individual differences in using auditory cues for SRM. From the MAS thresholds, more than half of the children with BiCIs demonstrated robust access to interaural differences without needing additional monaural head shadow for SRM. Both experiments led to the conclusion that individualized fitting strategies in the bilateral devices may be warranted to maximize spatial hearing for children with BiCIs in complex auditory environments.
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.