ArticleAudiology research2024
Hebrew Digits in Noise (DIN) Test in Cochlear Implant Users and Normal Hearing Listeners.
Article in Audiology research, 2024. 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.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the Hebrew version of the digits-in-noise (DIN) thresholds among cochlear implant (CI) users and their normal-hearing (NH) counterparts, explore the influence of age on these thresholds, examine the effects of early auditory exposure versus its absence on DIN threshold, and assess the correlation between DIN thresholds and other speech perception tests. A total of 13 children with CI (aged 5.5-11 years), 15 pre-lingual CI users (aged 14-30 years), and 15 post-lingual CI users (aged 22-77 years), and their age-matched NH controls (n = 45) participated in the study. Speech perception tasks, including the DIN test, one-syllable word test, and sentence identification tasks in various auditory conditions, served as the main outcome measures. The results indicated that CI users exhibited higher speech reception thresholds in noise across all age groups compared to NH peers, with no significant difference between pre-lingual and post-lingual CI users. Significant differences were also observed in monosyllabic word and sentence accuracy in both quiet and noise conditions between CI and NH groups. Furthermore, correlations were observed between the DIN and other speech perception tests. The study concludes that CI users require a notably higher signal-to-noise ratio to discern digits in noise, underscoring the DIN test's utility in assessing speech recognition capabilities in CI users while emphasizing the need for a comprehensive test battery to fully gauge their speech perception abilities.
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.