Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36695909›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2023

Effect of interaural electrode insertion depth difference and independent band selection on sentence recognition in noise and spatial release from masking in simulated bilateral cochlear implant listening.

Hasna Fathima, Jayashree S Bhat, Arivudai Nambi Pitchaimuthu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2023. 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

3 authors.

Hasna FathimaDepartment of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, 575001, India.
Jayashree S BhatKasturba Medical College Hospital, Ambedkar Circle, Mangalore, Karnataka, 575001, India.
Arivudai Nambi PitchaimuthuDepartment of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, 575001, India. Arivudai.nambi@manipal.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7399-5334

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeInter-aural insertion depth difference (IEDD) in bilateral cochlear implant (BiCI) with continuous interleaved sampling (CIS) processing is known to reduce the recognition of speech in noise and spatial release from masking (SRM). However, the independent channel selection in the 'n-of-m' sound coding strategy might have a different effect on speech recognition and SRM when compared to the effects of IEDD in CIS-based findings. This study aimed to investigate the effect of bilateral 'n-of-m' processing strategy and interaural electrode insertion depth difference on speech recognition in noise and SRM under conditions that simulated bilateral cochlear implant listening.

methodsFive young adults with normal hearing sensitivity participated in the study. The target sentences were spatially filtered to originate from 0° and the masker was spatially filtered at 0°, 15°, 37.5°, and 90° using the Oldenburg head-related transfer function database for behind the ear microphone. A 22-channel sine wave vocoder processing based on 'n-of-m' processing was applied to the spatialized target-masker mixture, in each ear. The perceptual experiment involved a test of speech recognition in noise under one co-located condition (target and masker at 0°) and three spatially separated conditions (target at 0°, masker at 15°, 37.5°, or 90° to the right ear).

resultsThe results were analyzed using a three-way repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA). The effect of interaural insertion depth difference (F (2,8) = 3.145, p = 0.098, ɳ

conclusionsSpeech recognition in noise and SRM were not affected by IEDD ≤ 3 mm. Bilateral 'n-of-m' processing resulted in reduced speech recognition in noise and SRM.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsSpeech PerceptionAuditory PerceptionHumansNoisePerceptual MaskingYoung AdultAdvanced combined encoderBilateral cochlear implantBinaural hearing‘n-of-m’ processingSpatial release from maskingVocoder processing

Identifiers

PMID36695909
PMCPMC10220123

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.