SynthesisFrontiers in human neuroscience2024
Hearing rehabilitation of adults with auditory processing disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence-based interventions.
Synthesis in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retrocochlear Auditory Dysfunctions (RADs) and Their Treatment: A Narrative Review.Audiology research · 2025Review
- From Clinic to Reality: Integrating Sound Field Testing and Hearing Quality Measures in Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Auditory cognition lab: a music therapy and speech-language pathology co-treatment for military-connected populations with auditory and cognitive impairment.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: For adults with auditory processing disorder (APD), listening and communicating can be difficult, potentially leading to social isolation, depression, employment difficulties and certainly reducing the quality of life. Despite existing practice guidelines suggesting treatments, the efficacy of these interventions remains uncertain due to a lack of comprehensive reviews. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to establish current evidence on the effectiveness of interventions for APD in adults, addressing the urgent need for clarity in the field. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a systematic search across MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Web of Science and Scopus, focusing on intervention studies involving adults with APD. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were grouped according to intervention with a meta-analysis only conducted where intervention, study design and outcome measure were comparable. Results: Out of 1,618 screened records, 13 studies were included, covering auditory training (AT), low-gain hearing aids (LGHA), and personal remote microphone systems (PRMS). Our analysis revealed: AT, Mixed results with some improvements in speech intelligibility and listening ability, indicating potential benefits but highlighting the need for standardized protocols; LGHA, The included studies demonstrated significant improvements in monaural low redundancy speech testing ( Discussion: PRMS presents the most evidence-supported intervention for adults with APD, although further high-quality research is crucial for all intervention types. The establishment and implementation of standardized intervention protocols alongside rigorously validated outcome measures will enable a more evidence-based approach to managing APD in adults.
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.