ArticleScientific reports2022
The impairment of speech perception in noise following pure tone hearing recovery in patients with sudden sensorineural hearing loss.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic Factors in Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: The Experience of Two Audiology Tertiary Referral Centres.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Assessment of Peripheral and Central Auditory Processing after Treatment for Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2024Article
- Subjective tinnitus patients with normal pure-tone hearing still suffer more informational masking in the noisy environment.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
To explore whether patients with unilateral idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (uISSNHL) have normal speech in noise (SIN) perception under different masking conditions after complete recovery of pure tone audiometry. Eight completely recovered uISSNHL patients were enrolled in ISSNHL group, while 8 normal-hearing adults matched with age, gender, and education experience were selected as the control group. Each group was tested SIN under four masking conditions, including noise and speech maskings with and without spatial separation cues. For both ISSNHL and control groups a two-way ANOVA showed a statistically significant effect of masking type (p = 0.007 vs p = 0.012). A significant effect of perceived spatial separation (p < 0.001 vs p < 0.001). A significant interaction between masking type and perceived spatial separation was found (p < 0.001 vs p < 0.001). A paired sample T-test showed that the SIN perception of the control group was statistically significant lower than that of ISSNHL patients only under speech masking without spatial separation cues (p = 0.011). There were still abnormalities in the auditory center shortly after complete recovery in the ISSNHL group (within 2 weeks). However, the auditory periphery and higher-level ability to use spatial cues was normal.
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.