ArticleBrain sciences2022
Relationship between Behavioral and Objective Measures of Sound Intensity in Normal-Hearing Listeners and Hearing-Aid Users: A Pilot Study.
Article in Brain sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05586555 (A Monocentric Study Evaluating Pupillometry as an Objective Measurement for Cochlear Implant), which is not on this 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.
A Monocentric Study Evaluating Pupillometry as an Objective Measurement for Cochlear Implant (CI) Fittings
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Speech-Evoked Cortical Auditory Potentials as Biomarkers of Auditory Maturation in Children with Cochlear Implants.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Emotional contagion to vocal smile revealed by combined pupil reactivity and motor resonance.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Interaural speech asymmetry predicts bilateral speech intelligibility but not listening effort in adults with bilateral cochlear implants.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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: For hearing-impaired individuals, hearing aids are clinically fit according to subjective measures of threshold and loudness. The goal of this study was to evaluate objective measures of loudness perception that might benefit hearing aid fitting. Method: Seventeen adult hearing aid users and 17 normal-hearing adults participated in the study. Outcome measures including categorical loudness scaling, cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs), and pupillometry. Stimuli were 1-kHz tone bursts presented at 40, 60, and 80 dBA. Results: Categorical loudness scaling showed that loudness significantly increased with intensity for all participants (p < 0.05). For CAEPs, high intensity was associated with greater P1, N1, and P2 peak amplitude for all listeners (p < 0.05); a significant but small effect of hearing aid amplification was observed. For all participants, pupillometry showed significant effects of high intensity on pupil dilation (p < 0.05); there was no significant effect of hearing aid amplification. A Focused Principal Component analysis revealed significant correlations between subjective loudness and some of the objective measures. Conclusion: The present data suggest that intensity had a significant impact on loudness perception, CAEPs, and pupil response. The correlations suggest that pupillometry and/or CAEPs may be useful in determining comfortable amplification for hearing aids.
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.