Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38676325›Full record

ArticleTrends in hearing

On the Feasibility of Using Behavioral Listening Effort Test Methods to Evaluate Auditory Performance in Cochlear Implant Users.

Maartje M E Hendrikse, Gertjan Dingemanse, André Goedegebure

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 45% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maartje M E HendrikseDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7704-6555
Gertjan DingemanseDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8837-3474
André GoedegebureDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Realistic outcome measures that reflect everyday hearing challenges are needed to assess hearing aid and cochlear implant (CI) fitting. Literature suggests that listening effort measures may be more sensitive to differences between hearing-device settings than established speech intelligibility measures when speech intelligibility is near maximum. Which method provides the most effective measurement of listening effort for this purpose is currently unclear. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of two tests for measuring changes in listening effort in CI users due to signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) differences, as would arise from different hearing-device settings. By comparing the effect size of SNR differences on listening effort measures with test-retest differences, the study evaluated the suitability of these tests for clinical use. Nineteen CI users underwent two listening effort tests at two SNRs (+4 and +8 dB relative to individuals' 50% speech perception threshold). We employed dual-task paradigms-a sentence-final word identification and recall test (SWIRT) and a sentence verification test (SVT)-to assess listening effort at these two SNRs. Our results show a significant difference in listening effort between the SNRs for both test methods, although the effect size was comparable to the test-retest difference, and the sensitivity was not superior to speech intelligibility measures. Thus, the implementations of SVT and SWIRT used in this study are not suitable for clinical use to measure listening effort differences of this magnitude in individual CI users. However, they can be used in research involving CI users to analyze group data.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsFeasibility StudiesPersons with Hearing DisabilitiesSpeech IntelligibilitySpeech PerceptionAcoustic StimulationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAuditory ThresholdCorrection of Hearing ImpairmentFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Agedclinical usedual taskspeech intelligibilitytest–retest reliability

Identifiers

PMID38676325
PMCPMC11055488
OpenAlexW4395699491

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.