Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39195628›Full record

ArticleTrends in hearing

The Benefit of Hearing Aids as Measured by Listening Accuracy, Subjective Listening Effort, and Functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy.

Jonathan M Vaisberg, Sean Gilmore, Jinyu Qian, Frank A Russo

Abstract 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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Parents' neural dynamics in response to their children's speech.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Jonathan M VaisbergInnovation Centre Toronto, Sonova Canada Inc., Kitchener, ON, Canada.
Sean GilmoreDepartment of Psychology, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jinyu QianInnovation Centre Toronto, Sonova Canada Inc., Kitchener, ON, Canada.
Frank A RussoDepartment of Psychology, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2939-6358

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is broad consensus that listening effort is an important outcome for measuring hearing performance. However, there remains debate on the best ways to measure listening effort. This study sought to measure neural correlates of listening effort using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in experienced adult hearing aid users. The study evaluated impacts of amplification and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) on cerebral blood oxygenation, with the expectation that easier listening conditions would be associated with less oxygenation in the prefrontal cortex. Thirty experienced adult hearing aid users repeated sentence-final words from low-context Revised Speech Perception in Noise Test sentences. Participants repeated words at a hard SNR (individual SNR-50) or easy SNR (individual SNR-50 + 10 dB), while wearing hearing aids fit to prescriptive targets or without wearing hearing aids. In addition to assessing listening accuracy and subjective listening effort, prefrontal blood oxygenation was measured using fNIRS. As expected, easier listening conditions (i.e., easy SNR, with hearing aids) led to better listening accuracy, lower subjective listening effort, and lower oxygenation across the entire prefrontal cortex compared to harder listening conditions. Listening accuracy and subjective listening effort were also significant predictors of oxygenation.

Indexed as

Hearing AidsSpectroscopy, Near-InfraredSpeech PerceptionAcoustic StimulationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAuditory ThresholdCerebrovascular CirculationCorrection of Hearing ImpairmentFemaleHearingHumansMaleMiddle AgedNoisefunctional near-infrared spectroscopyhearing aidslistening effortspeech in noise

Identifiers

PMID39195628
PMCPMC11363059

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.