ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021
Speech Recognition and Listening Effort in Cochlear Implant Recipients and Normal-Hearing Listeners.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Longitudinal adaptations in neural and behavioral systems following hearing restoration using cochlear implants.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Alpha oscillatory activity reveals focused-attentional disparity between cochlear implant users and normal hearing listeners.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Listening effort among adult cochlear implant users: a protocol for a systematic review and measure-specific meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Impact of visual mouth image presentation on speech perception in noise in normal hearing subjects and cochlear implant users.PloS one · 2026Article
- Sentence recall and neurophysiological effects of the "2-Sentence Problem" under time compression in younger and older listeners.Hearing research · 2025Article
- WeNet-RF: An Automatic Classification Model for Financial Reimbursement Budget Items.PloS one · 2025Article
- Enhancing Cochlear Implant Outcomes across Age Groups: The Interplay of Forward Focus and Advanced Combination Encoder Coding Strategies in Noisy Conditions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Influence of Age on Speech Recognition in Noise and Hearing Effort in Listeners with Age-Related Hearing Loss.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Electro-vibrational stimulation results in improved speech perception in noise for cochlear implant users with bilateral residual hearing.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Listening effort and fatigue among cochlear implant users: a scoping review.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Exploring neurocognitive factors and brain activation in adult cochlear implant recipients associated with speech perception outcomes-A scoping review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Article
- Neural Activity During Audiovisual Speech Processing: Protocol For a Functional Neuroimaging Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Age effects on cognitive functions and speech-in-noise processing: An event-related potential study with cochlear-implant users and normal-hearing listeners.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- The Impact of Trained Conditions on the Generalization of Learning Gains Following Voice Discrimination Training.Trends in hearingArticle
- Article
- On the Feasibility of Using Behavioral Listening Effort Test Methods to Evaluate Auditory Performance in Cochlear Implant Users.Trends in hearingArticle
- Effects of Talker Sex Differences on Binaural Summation in Cochlear Implant Users and Normal Hearing Listeners.Trends in hearingArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The outcome of cochlear implantation is typically assessed by speech recognition tests in quiet and in noise. Many cochlear implant recipients reveal satisfactory speech recognition especially in quiet situations. However, since cochlear implants provide only limited spectro-temporal cues the effort associated with understanding speech might be increased. In this respect, measures of listening effort could give important extra information regarding the outcome of cochlear implantation. In order to shed light on this topic and to gain knowledge for clinical applications we compared speech recognition and listening effort in cochlear implants (CI) recipients and age-matched normal-hearing listeners while considering potential influential factors, such as cognitive abilities. Importantly, we estimated speech recognition functions for both listener groups and compared listening effort at similar performance level. Therefore, a subjective listening effort test (adaptive scaling, "ACALES") as well as an objective test (dual-task paradigm) were applied and compared. Regarding speech recognition CI users needed about 4 dB better signal-to-noise ratio to reach the same performance level of 50% as NH listeners and even 5 dB better SNR to reach 80% speech recognition revealing shallower psychometric functions in the CI listeners. However, when targeting a fixed speech intelligibility of 50 and 80%, respectively, CI users and normal hearing listeners did not differ significantly in terms of listening effort. This applied for both the subjective and the objective estimation. Outcome for subjective and objective listening effort was not correlated with each other nor with age or cognitive abilities of the listeners. This study did not give evidence that CI users and NH listeners differ in terms of listening effort - at least when the same performance level is considered. In contrast, both listener groups showed large inter-individual differences in effort determined with the subjective scaling and the objective dual-task. Potential clinical implications of how to assess listening effort as an outcome measure for hearing rehabilitation are discussed.
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.