ReviewAudiology research2024
State-of-the-Art on the Impact of Bimodal Acoustic Stimulation on Speech Perception in Noise in Adults: A Systematic Review.
Review in Audiology research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tuning in: How Hearing Loss and Assistive Devices Reshape Musical Quality of Life.Audiology research · 2026Article
- Longitudinal Cochlear Implant Outcomes in Danish Adults: Changes in Speech Recognition, Self-Reported Hearing Ability, Hearing-Related Quality of Life, and Tinnitus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Management of Audiological Disorders in Cochlear Implants: Outcomes in Demanding Listening Situations and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- DX243 counteracts both acoustic trauma-induced reduction in cortical brain oscillations and cochlear synaptopathy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesBimodal stimulation (BS), which combines the use of a cochlear implant (CI) in one ear and a hearing aid (HA) in the opposite ear, is an established strategy to treat hearing loss by exploiting the unique capabilities of each device. CIs stimulate the auditory nerve by bypassing damaged hair cells, while HAs amplify sounds by requiring a functional hearing residual. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of BS such as speech perception in noise.
methodsWe examined clinical studies published from October 2020 to July 2024, following the PRISMA guidelines, focusing on the advantages and disadvantages of BS on speech perception in noise in adulthood.
resultsBS in adult patients significantly improves speech perception in quiet and noisy environments, especially for those with increased residual hearing. Unilateral CIs and BS perform similarly in quiet conditions, but BS significantly improves speech discrimination in noisy environments if loudness between the two devices is appropriately balanced.
conclusionsDirectional microphones and programming software are new technologies that succeed in reducing environmental noise and improving verbal perception outcomes, although their features in the literature are controversial. In addition, the individuals using BS may face temporal mismatches mainly due to differing device latencies, affecting sound localization. Compensating for these mismatches can enhance localization accuracy. However, modulated noise remains a significant obstacle to verbal perception in noise. Valuable assessment tools such as music tests provide further information on hearing performance and quality of life. More research is needed to define certain selection criteria.
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.