ArticleTrends in hearing
Spatial Release From Masking With Bilateral Bone Conduction Stimulation at Mastoid for Normal Hearing Subjects.
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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating binaural hearing capabilities in individuals with sensorineural hearing loss through bilateral bone conduction stimulation.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the effect of spatial release from masking (SRM) in bilateral bone conduction (BC) stimulation at the mastoid. Nine adults with normal hearing were tested to determine SRM based on speech recognition thresholds (SRTs) in simulated spatial configurations ranging from 0 to 180 degrees. These configurations were based on nonindividualized head-related transfer functions. The participants were subjected to sound stimulation through either air conduction (AC) via headphones or BC. The results indicated that both the angular separation between the target and the masker, and the modality of sound stimulation, significantly influenced speech recognition performance. As the angular separation between the target and the masker increased up to 150°, both BC and AC SRTs decreased, indicating improved performance. However, performance slightly deteriorated when the angular separation exceeded 150°. For spatial separations less than 75°, BC stimulation provided greater spatial benefits than AC, although this difference was not statistically significant. For separations greater than 75°, AC stimulation offered significantly more spatial benefits than BC. When speech and noise originated from the same side of the head, the "better ear effect" did not significantly contribute to SRM. However, when speech and noise were located on opposite sides of the head, this effect became dominant in SRM.
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.