ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022
Using Auditory Characteristics to Select Hearing Aid Compression Speeds for Presbycusic Patients.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is allergic rhinitis associated with hidden hearing loss in pediatric/adolescent patients? A cross-sectional study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Correlation between hearing loss and mild cognitive impairment in the elderly population: Mendelian randomization and cross-sectional study.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to select the optimal hearing aid compression speeds (fast-acting and slow-acting) for presbycusic patients by using auditory characteristics including temporal modulation and speech-in-noise performance. Methods: In total, 24 patients with unilateral or bilateral moderate sensorineural hearing loss who scored higher than 21 on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test participated in this study. The electrocochleogram (ECochG) results, including summating potentials (SP) and action potentials (AP), were recorded. Subjects' temporal modulation thresholds and speech recognition at 4 individualized signal-to-noise ratios were measured under three conditions, namely, unaided, aided with fast-acting compression (FAC), and aided with slow-acting compression (SAC). Results: The results of this study showed that modulation discrimination thresholds in the unaided (-8.14 dB) and aided SAC (-8.19 dB) conditions were better than the modulation thresholds in the FAC (-4.67 dB) conditions. The speech recognition threshold (SRT75%) for FAC (5.21 dB) did not differ significantly from SAC (3.39 dB) ( Conclusion: Both modes of compression speeds improved a presbycusic patient's speech recognition ability in noise. The SAC hearing aids may better preserve the modulation thresholds than the FAC hearing aids. The measurement of AP, along with the unaided modulation thresholds and unaided SRT75%, may help guide the selection of optimal compression speeds for individual presbycusic patients.
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.