Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35649892›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2022

Impacts of signal processing factors on perceptual restoration in cochlear-implant users.

Brittany N Jaekel, Sarah Weinstein, Rochelle S Newman, Matthew J Goupell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Brittany N JaekelDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6118-530X
Sarah WeinsteinDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA.
Rochelle S NewmanDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1626-4241
Matthew J GoupellDepartment of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2662-3057

Funding

COMPARATIVE AND EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY OF HEARINGT32DC000046 · NIDCD · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI Catherine Emily Carr, Matthew J. Goupell · 1994 to 2026
$7.5M
Binaural unmasking of tones and speech in bilateral cochlear implanteesR01DC014948 · NIDCD · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI GOUPELL, MATTHEW J. · 2016 to 2020
$1.9M
Effects of interrupting noise and speech repair mechanisms in child and adult cochlear-implant usersF31DC017362 · NIDCD · UNIV OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK · PI JAEKEL, BRITTANY · 2018 to 2019
$66k
NIDCD NIH HHS F31 DC017362NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC014948NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC000046
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cochlear-implant (CI) users have previously demonstrated perceptual restoration, or successful repair of noise-interrupted speech, using the interrupted sentences paradigm [Bhargava, Gaudrain, and Başkent (2014). "Top-down restoration of speech in cochlear-implant users," Hear. Res. 309, 113-123]. The perceptual restoration effect was defined experimentally as higher speech understanding scores with noise-burst interrupted sentences compared to silent-gap interrupted sentences. For the perceptual restoration illusion to occur, it is often necessary for the masking or interrupting noise bursts to have a higher intensity than the adjacent speech signal to be perceived as a plausible masker. Thus, signal processing factors like noise reduction algorithms and automatic gain control could have a negative impact on speech repair in this population. Surprisingly, evidence that participants with cochlear implants experienced the perceptual restoration illusion was not observed across the two planned experiments. A separate experiment, which aimed to provide a close replication of previous work on perceptual restoration in CI users, also found no consistent evidence of perceptual restoration, contrasting the original study's previously reported findings. Typical speech repair of interrupted sentences was not observed in the present work's sample of CI users, and signal-processing factors did not appear to affect speech repair.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsIllusionsSpeech PerceptionAcoustic StimulationHumansSpeech Intelligibility

Identifiers

PMID35649892
PMCPMC9054268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.