ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Listening-Based Communication Ability in Adults With Hearing Loss: A Scoping Review of Existing Measures.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Perceived listening ability and hearing loss: Systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Living with age-related hearing loss and insights for hearing care: a qualitative descriptive study.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2026Article
- Closing the Loop on the Cocktail Party Effect: From Attention Decoding to Neuro-Steered Selective Hearing.Biology · 2026Article
- A Moderated Mediation Model Linking Speech-in-Noise Exposure, Speech Perception in Noise Ability, Loneliness, and Depression.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- What to Measure? Development of a Core Outcome Set to Assess Remote Technologies for Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a procedure to test perception of speech prosody in listeners with cochlear implants.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
- Psychometric Evaluation of a Digitally Recorded Urdu Monosyllabic Word List for Word Recognition Score Testing.Journal of audiology & otology · 2025Article
- Article
- The effect of aging and asymmetrical hearing on speech discrimination.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- 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
- Effects of entropy in real-world noise on speech perception in listeners with normal hearing and hearing lossa).The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Hearing loss in adults has a pervasive impact on health and well-being. Its effects on everyday listening and communication can directly influence participation across multiple spheres of life. These impacts, however, remain poorly assessed within clinical settings. Whilst various tests and questionnaires that measure listening and communication abilities are available, there is a lack of consensus about which measures assess the factors that are most relevant to optimising auditory rehabilitation. This study aimed to map current measures used in published studies to evaluate listening skills needed for oral communication in adults with hearing loss. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using systematic searches in Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and Google Scholar to retrieve peer-reviewed articles that used one or more linguistic-based measure necessary to oral communication in adults with hearing loss. The range of measures identified and their frequency where charted in relation to auditory hierarchies, linguistic domains, health status domains, and associated neuropsychological and cognitive domains. Results: 9121 articles were identified and 2579 articles that reported on 6714 discrete measures were included for further analysis. The predominant linguistic-based measure reported was word or sentence identification in quiet (65.9%). In contrast, discourse-based measures were used in 2.7% of the articles included. Of the included studies, 36.6% used a self-reported instrument purporting to measures of listening for communication. Consistent with previous studies, a large number of self-reported measures were identified ( Discussion: Current measures used in published studies to assess listening abilities relevant to oral communication target a narrow set of domains. Concepts of communicative interaction have limited representation in current measurement. The lack of measurement consensus and heterogeneity amongst the assessments limit comparisons across studies. Furthermore, extracted measures rarely consider the broader linguistic, cognitive and interactive elements of communication. Consequently, existing measures may have limited clinical application if assessing the listening-related skills required for communication in daily life, as experienced by adults with hearing loss.
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.