Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35484022›Full record

ArticleHearing research2022

Modelling speech reception thresholds and their improvements due to spatial noise reduction algorithms in bimodal cochlear implant users.

Ayham Zedan, Tim Jürgens, Ben Williges, David Hülsmeier, Birger Kollmeier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hearing research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ayham ZedanMedizinische Physik and Cluster of Excellence "Hearing4all," Carl-von-Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany. Electronic address: ayham.zedan@uni-oldenburg.de.
Tim JürgensInstitut für Akustik, Technische Hochschule Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany. Electronic address: tim.juergens@th-luebeck.de.
Ben WilligesMedizinische Physik and Cluster of Excellence "Hearing4all," Carl-von-Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany; SOUND Lab & Cambridge Hearing Group, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Electronic address: bw429@medschl.cam.ac.uk.
David HülsmeierMedizinische Physik and Cluster of Excellence "Hearing4all," Carl-von-Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany. Electronic address: david.huelsmeier@uni-oldenburg.de.
Birger KollmeierMedizinische Physik and Cluster of Excellence "Hearing4all," Carl-von-Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany. Electronic address: birger.kollmeier@uni-oldenburg.de.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/S002537/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spatial noise reduction algorithms ("beamformers") can considerably improve speech reception thresholds (SRTs) for bimodal cochlear implant (CI) users. The goal of this study was to model SRTs and SRT-benefit due to beamformers for bimodal CI users. Two existing model approaches varying in computational complexity and binaural processing assumption were compared: (i) the framework of auditory discrimination experiments (FADE) and (ii) the binaural speech intelligibility model (BSIM), both with CI and aided hearing-impaired front-ends. The exact same acoustic scenarios, and open-access beamformers as in the comparison clinical study Zedan et al. (2021) were used to quantify goodness of prediction. FADE was capable of modeling SRTs ab-initio, i.e., no calibration of the model was necessary to achieve high correlations and low root-mean square errors (RMSE) to both, measured SRTs (r = 0.85, RMSE = 2.8 dB) and to measured SRT-benefits (r = 0.96). BSIM achieved somewhat poorer predictions to both, measured SRTs (r = 0.78, RMSE = 6.7 dB) and to measured SRT-benefits (r = 0.91) and needs to be calibrated for matching average SRTs in one condition. Greatest deviations in predictions of BSIM were observed in diffuse multi-talker babble noise, which were not found with FADE. SRT-benefit predictions of both models were similar to instrumental signal-to-noise ratio (iSNR) improvements due to the beamformers. This indicates that FADE is preferrable for modeling absolute SRTs. However, for prediction of SRT-benefit due to spatial noise reduction algorithms in bimodal CI users, the average iSNR is a much simpler approach with similar performance.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsSpeech PerceptionAlgorithmsHearingSpeech IntelligibilityBeamformersBimodalCochlear implantsModellingSpeech recognition

Identifiers

PMID35484022
PMCPMC9188268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.