ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Audiology2022
Remote-Microphone Benefit in Noise and Reverberation for Children Who are Hard of Hearing.
Article in Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Remote Microphones Support Speech Recognition in Noise and Reverberation for Children With a Language Disorder.Language, speech, and hearing services in schools · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRemote-microphone (RM) systems are designed to reduce the impact of poor acoustics on speech understanding. However, there is limited research examining the effects of adding reverberation to noise on speech understanding when using hearing aids (HAs) and RM systems. Given the significant challenges posed by environments with poor acoustics for children who are hard of hearing, we evaluated the ability of a novel RM system to address the effects of noise and reverberation. PURPOSE: We assessed the effect of a recently developed RM system on aided speech perception of children who were hard of hearing in noise and reverberation and how their performance compared to peers who are not hard of hearing (i.e., who have hearing thresholds no greater than 15 dB HL). The effect of aided speech audibility on sentence recognition when using an RM system also was assessed. STUDY SAMPLE: Twenty-two children with mild to severe hearing loss and 17 children who were not hard of hearing (i.e., with hearing thresholds no greater than 15 dB HL) (7-18 years) participated. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: An adaptive procedure was used to determine the signal-to-noise ratio for 50 and 95% correct sentence recognition in noise and noise plus reverberation (RT 300 ms). Linear mixed models were used to examine the effect of listening conditions on speech recognition with RMs for both groups of children and the effects of aided audibility on performance across all listening conditions for children who were hard of hearing.
resultsChildren who were hard of hearing had poorer speech recognition for HAs alone than for HAs plus RM. Regardless of hearing status, children had poorer speech recognition in noise plus reverberation than in noise alone. Children who were hard of hearing had poorer speech recognition than peers with thresholds no greater than 15 dB HL when using HAs alone but comparable or better speech recognition with HAs plus RM. Children with better-aided audibility with the HAs showed better speech recognition with the HAs alone and with HAs plus RM.
conclusionProviding HAs that maximize speech audibility and coupling them with RM systems has the potential to improve communication access and outcomes for children who are hard of hearing in environments with noise and reverberation.
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.