ArticleInterspeech2018
Testing paradigms for assistive hearing devices in diverse acoustic environments.
Article in Interspeech, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A convolutional neural network-based framework for analysis and assessment of non-linguistic sound classification and enhancement for normal hearing and cochlear implant listeners.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022Article
- An evaluation framework for research platforms to advance cochlear implant/hearing aid technology: A case study with CCi-MOBILE.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021Article
- CCi-MOBILE: Design and Evaluation of a Cochlear Implant and Hearing Aid Research Platform for Speech Scientists and Engineers.... IEEE-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics. IEEE-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Many individuals worldwide are at risk of hearing loss due to unsafe acoustical exposure and chronic listening experience using personal audio devices. Assistive hearing devices(AHD), such as hearing-aids(HAs) and cochlear-implants(CIs) are a common choice for the restoration and rehabilitation of the auditory function. Audio sound processors in CIs and HAs operate within limits, prescribed by audiologists, not only for acceptable sound perception but also for safety reasons. Signal processing(SP) engineers follow best design practices to ensure reliable performance and incorporate necessary safety checks within the design of SP strategies to ensure safety limits are never exceeded irrespective of acoustic environments. This paper proposes a comprehensive testing and evaluation paradigm to investigate the behavior of audio devices that addresses the safety concerns in diverse acoustic conditions. This is achieved by characterizing the performance of devices with large amounts of acoustic inputs and monitoring the output behavior. The CCi-MOBILE Research-Interface(RI) (used for CI/HA research) is used in this study as the testing paradigm. Factors such as pulse-width(PW), inter-phase gap(IPG) and a number of other parameters are estimated to evaluate the impact of AHDs on hearing comfort, subjective sound quality and characterize audio devices in terms of listening perception and biological safety.
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.