Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34784399›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

On prediction of aided behavioural measures using speech auditory brainstem responses and decision trees.

Emanuele Perugia, Ghada BinKhamis, Josef Schlittenlacher, Karolina Kluk

Erratum issuedAbstract 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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

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

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Emanuele PerugiaManchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4392-6933
Ghada BinKhamisManchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7696-1073
Josef SchlittenlacherManchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Karolina KlukManchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3638-2787

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current clinical strategies to assess benefits from hearing aids (HAs) are based on self-reported questionnaires and speech-in-noise (SIN) tests; which require behavioural cooperation. Instead, objective measures based on Auditory Brainstem Responses (ABRs) to speech stimuli would not require the individuals' cooperation. Here, we re-analysed an existing dataset to predict behavioural measures with speech-ABRs using regression trees. Ninety-two HA users completed a self-reported questionnaire (SSQ-Speech) and performed two aided SIN tests: sentences in noise (BKB-SIN) and vowel-consonant-vowels (VCV) in noise. Speech-ABRs were evoked by a 40 ms [da] and recorded in 2x2 conditions: aided vs. unaided and quiet vs. background noise. For each recording condition, two sets of features were extracted: 1) amplitudes and latencies of speech-ABR peaks, 2) amplitudes and latencies of speech-ABR F0 encoding. Two regression trees were fitted for each of the three behavioural measures with either feature set and age, digit-span forward and backward, and pure tone average (PTA) as possible predictors. The PTA was the only predictor in the SSQ-Speech trees. In the BKB-SIN trees, performance was predicted by the aided latency of peak F in quiet for participants with PTAs between 43 and 61 dB HL. In the VCV trees, performance was predicted by the aided F0 encoding latency and the aided amplitude of peak VA in quiet for participants with PTAs ≤ 47 dB HL. These findings indicate that PTA was more informative than any speech-ABR measure, as these were relevant only for a subset of the participants. Therefore, speech-ABRs evoked by a 40 ms [da] are not a clinical predictor of behavioural measures in HA users.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorDatabases, FactualDecision TreesEvoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain StemHearing AidsHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareSpeechSpeech PerceptionSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID34784399
PMCPMC8594837

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.