ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Audiology2021
Audibility and Spectral-Ripple Discrimination Thresholds as Predictors of Word Recognition with Nonlinear Frequency Compression.
Article in Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNonlinear frequency compression (NFC) lowers high-frequency sounds to a lower frequency and is used to improve high-frequency audibility. However, the efficacy of NFC varies widely-while some individuals benefit from NFC, many do not. Spectral resolution is one factor that might explain individual benefit from NFC. Because individuals with better spectral resolution understand more speech than those with poorer spectral resolution, it was hypothesized that individual benefit from NFC could be predicted from the change in spectral resolution measured with NFC relative to a condition without NFC. PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the impact of NFC on access to spectral information and whether these changes predict individual benefit from NFC for adults with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). RESEARCH
designPresent study is a quasi-experimental cohort study. Participants used a pair of hearing aids set to the Desired Sensation Level algorithm (DSL m[i/o]). STUDY SAMPLE: Participants were 19 adults with SNHL, recruited from the Boys Town National Research Hospital Participant Registry. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Participants were seated in a sound-attenuating booth and then percent-correct recognition of words, and spectral-ripple discrimination thresholds were measured for two different conditions, with and without NFC. Because audibility is known to influence spectral-ripple thresholds and benefit from NFC, audibility was quantified using the aided speech intelligibility index (SII). Linear mixed models were generated to predict word recognition using the aided SII and spectral-ripple discrimination thresholds.
resultsWhile NFC did not influence percent-correct word recognition, participants with higher (better) aided SII and spectral-ripple discrimination thresholds understood more words than those with either a lower aided SII or spectral-ripple discrimination threshold. Benefit from NFC was not predictable from a participant's aided SII or spectral-ripple discrimination threshold.
conclusionWe have extended previous work on the effect of audibility on benefit from NFC to include a measure of spectral resolution, the spectral-ripple discrimination threshold. Clinically, these results suggest that patients with better audibility and spectral resolution will understand speech better than those with poorer audibility or spectral resolution; however, these results are inconsistent with the notion that individual benefit from NFC is predictable from aided audibility or spectral resolution.
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.