Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34762024›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of audiology2022

The effect of stimulus duration on preferences for gain adjustments when listening to speech.

William M Whitmer, Benjamin Caswell-Midwinter, Graham Naylor

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of audiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 86% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

William M WhitmerHearing Sciences - Scottish Section, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8618-6851
Benjamin Caswell-MidwinterHearing Sciences - Scottish Section, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3386-3860
Graham NaylorHearing Sciences - Scottish Section, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1544-1944
University of Nottingham · GBMassachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · US

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S003576/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn the personalisation of hearing-aid fittings, gain is often adjusted to suit patient preferences using live speech. When using brief sentences as stimuli, the minimum gain adjustments necessary to elicit consistent preferences ("preference thresholds") were previously found to be much greater than typical adjustments in current practice. The current study examined the role of duration on preference thresholds.

designParticipants heard 2, 4 and 6-s segments of a continuous monologue presented successively in pairs. The first segment of each pair was presented at each individual's real-ear or prescribed gain. The second segment was presented with a ±0-12 dB gain adjustment in one of three frequency bands. Participants judged whether the second was "better", "worse" or "no different" from the first. STUDY SAMPLE: Twenty-nine adults, all with hearing-aid experience.

resultsThe minimum gain adjustments needed to elicit "better" or "worse" judgments decreased with increasing duration for most adjustments. Inter-participant agreement and intra-participant reliability increased with increasing duration up to 4 s, then remained stable.

conclusionsProviding longer stimuli improves the likelihood of patients providing reliable judgments of hearing-aid gain adjustments, but the effect is limited, and alternative fitting methods may be more viable for effective hearing-aid personalisation.

Indexed as

Hearing AidsHearing Loss, SensorineuralSpeech PerceptionAdultHumansReproducibility of ResultsSpeechdurationfine-tuninggainHearing-aid fitting

Identifiers

PMID34762024
PMCPMC7613777
OpenAlexW3208782142

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.