Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38179670›Full record

ArticleTrends in hearing

Amplitude Compression for Preventing Rollover at Above-Conversational Speech Levels.

Michal Fereczkowski, Raul H Sanchez-Lopez, Stine Christiansen, 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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Hearing Aids: What Works Well and What Can Be Improved.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2026
    Review
  2. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michal FereczkowskiInstitute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-7960-1188
Raul H Sanchez-LopezInteracoustics Research Unit, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-5239-2339
Stine ChristiansenInstitute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Tobias NeherInstitute of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1107-9274
University of Southern Denmark · DKInteracoustics (Denmark) · DK

Funding

Fund Denmark Grand Solutions 5164 00011BWilliam Demant Foundation 21-2011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hearing aids provide nonlinear amplification to improve speech audibility and loudness perception. While more audibility typically increases speech intelligibility at low levels, the same is not true for above-conversational levels, where decreases in intelligibility ("rollover") can occur. In a previous study, we found rollover in speech intelligibility measurements made in quiet for 35 out of 74 test ears with a hearing loss. Furthermore, we found rollover occurrence in quiet to be associated with poorer speech intelligibility in noise as measured with linear amplification. Here, we retested 16 participants with rollover with three amplitude-compression settings. Two were designed to prevent rollover by applying slow- or fast-acting compression with a 5:1 compression ratio around the "sweet spot," that is, the area in an individual performance-intensity function with high intelligibility and listening comfort. The third, reference setting used gains and compression ratios prescribed by the "National Acoustic Laboratories Non-Linear 1" rule. Speech intelligibility was assessed in quiet and in noise. Pairwise preference judgments were also collected. For speech levels of 70 dB SPL and above, slow-acting sweet-spot compression gave better intelligibility in quiet and noise than the reference setting. Additionally, the participants clearly preferred slow-acting sweet-spot compression over the other settings. At lower levels, the three settings gave comparable speech intelligibility, and the participants preferred the reference setting over both sweet-spot settings. Overall, these results suggest that, for listeners with rollover, slow-acting sweet-spot compression is beneficial at 70 dB SPL and above, while at lower levels clinically established gain targets are more suited.

Indexed as

DeafnessHearing AidsHearing Loss, SensorineuralSpeech PerceptionHumansSpeech Intelligibilityamplificationhearing aidsindividual differencesspeech perception

Identifiers

PMID38179670
PMCPMC10771052
OpenAlexW4390613907

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.