Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35942807›Full record

ArticleTrends in hearing

Revisiting Auditory Profiling: Can Cognitive Factors Improve the Prediction of Aided Speech-in-Noise Outcome?

Mengfan Wu, Stine Christiansen, Michal Fereczkowski, Tobias Neher

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mengfan WuInstitute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, 6174University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-8794-4490
Stine ChristiansenInstitute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, 6174University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Michal FereczkowskiInstitute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, 6174University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Tobias NeherInstitute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, 6174University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1107-9274
University of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hearing aids (HA) are the most common type of rehabilitation treatment for age-related hearing loss. However, HA users often obtain limited benefit from their devices, particularly in noisy environments, and thus many HA candidates do not use them at all. A possible reason for this could be that current HA fittings are audiogram-based, that is, they neglect supra-threshold factors. In an earlier study, an auditory-profiling method was proposed as a basis for more personalized HA fittings. This method classifies HA users into four profiles that differ in terms of hearing sensitivity and supra-threshold hearing abilities. Previously, HA users belonging to these profiles showed significant differences in terms of speech recognition in noise but not subjective assessments of speech-in-noise (SIN) outcome. Moreover, large individual differences within some profiles were observed. The current study therefore explored if cognitive factors can help explain these differences and improve aided outcome prediction. Thirty-nine older HA users completed sets of auditory and SIN tests as well as two tablet-based cognitive measures (the Corsi block-tapping and trail-making tests). Principal component analyses were applied to extract the dominant sources of variance both within individual tests producing many variables and within the three types of tests. Multiple linear regression analyses performed on the extracted components showed that auditory factors were related to aided speech recognition in noise but not to subjective SIN outcome. Cognitive factors were unrelated to aided SIN outcome. Overall, these findings provide limited support for adding those two cognitive tests to the profiling of HA users.

Indexed as

Hearing AidsSpeech PerceptionAuditory ThresholdCognitionHumansNoiseSpeechcognitionhearing aidshearing lossindividual differencesspeech perception

Identifiers

PMID35942807
PMCPMC9373127
OpenAlexW4291397383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.