ArticleHearing research2023
Effects of age on brainstem coding of speech glimpses in interrupted noise.
Article in Hearing research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Difficulty understanding speech in fluctuating backgrounds is common among older adults. Whereas younger adults are adept at interpreting speech based on brief moments when the signal-to-noise ratio is favorable, older adults use these glimpses of speech less effectively. Age-related declines in auditory brainstem function may degrade the fidelity of speech cues in fluctuating noise for older adults, such that brief glimpses of speech interrupted by noise segments are not faithfully represented in the neural code that reaches the cortex. This hypothesis was tested using electrophysiological recordings of the envelope following response (EFR) elicited by glimpses of speech-like stimuli varying in duration (42, 70, 210 ms) and interrupted by silence or intervening noise. Responses from adults aged 23-73 years indicated that both age and hearing sensitivity were associated with EFR temporal coherence and response magnitude. Age was better than hearing sensitivity for predicting temporal coherence, whereas hearing sensitivity was better than age for predicting response magnitude. Poorer-fidelity EFRs were observed with shorter glimpses and with the addition of intervening noise. However, losses of fidelity with glimpse duration and noise were not associated with participant age or hearing sensitivity. These results suggest that the EFR is sensitive to factors commonly associated with glimpsing but do not entirely account for age-related changes in speech recognition in fluctuating backgrounds.
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.