ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2024
Reflection function, reflectance, and area function measurements in ears of children and adults.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2024. 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.
- Shape and sound analyses of the human ear-canal geometrya).The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The main experiment concerned time-domain measurements of the acoustical reflection function (RF) of the human ear in adults and children (aged 5 to 8 years) using a probe inserted into the ear canal. This RF was used to calculate the area function of the ear canal versus distance along its centerline. Acoustical reflectance was calculated in the frequency domain from the RF, as was the difference in sound pressure level near the tympanic membrane relative to the probe tip. Group responses in area function, total ear-canal length, absorbance and group delay, and admittance magnitude and phase were analyzed based on sex, ear, and age. Responses were compared between children/adults and younger/older adults relative to age 50 years. Ear and sex were never significant. Significant differences were observed in children compared to adults in the area function, absorbance and group delay, and admittance magnitude and phase (0.25-4 kHz). Group delay differed between younger and older adults. A second experiment assessed level dependence of responses to better understand limitations in probe performance observed in the main experiment. These results show the utility of time-domain measurements of the area function and derived reflectance to understand sound-transmission differences across age at frequencies important to middle-ear function.
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.