ArticleScientific reports2023
In-situ hearing threshold estimation using Gaussian process classification.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Changing Knowledge, Principles, and Technology in Contemporary Clinical Audiological Practice: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One in six Americans suffers from hearing loss. While treatment with amplification is possible for many, the acceptance rate of hearing aids is low. Poor device fitting is one of the reasons. The hearing aid fitting starts with a detailed hearing assessment by a trained audiologist in a sound-controlled environment, using standard equipment. The hearing aid is adjusted step-by-step, following well-described procedures based on the audiogram. However, for many patients in rural settings, considerable travel time to a hearing center discourages them from receiving a hearing test and treatment. We hypothesize that hearing assessment with the patient's hearing aid can reliably substitute the hearing test in the clinic. Over-the-counter hearing aids could be programmed from a distance and fine-tuned by the hearing aid wearer. This study shows that a patient-controlled hearing assessment via a hearing aid in a non-clinical setting is not statistically different from an audiologist-controlled hearing assessment in a clinical setting. The differences in hearing obtained with our device and the Gaussian Process are within 3 dB of the standard audiogram. At 250 Hz, the sound delivery with the hearing aid used in this study added an additional reduction of sound level, which was not compensated.
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.