Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39482327›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Spatial selective auditory attention is preserved in older age but is degraded by peripheral hearing loss.

Andrea Caso, Timothy D Griffiths, Emma Holmes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Andrea CasoDepartment of Speech Hearing and Phonetic Sciences, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, Chandler House, 2 Wakefield Street, London, WC1N 3PF, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4904-3610
Timothy D GriffithsBiosciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8066-4381
Emma HolmesDepartment of Speech Hearing and Phonetic Sciences, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, Chandler House, 2 Wakefield Street, London, WC1N 3PF, UK. emma.holmes@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-0314-6588

Funding

Royal National Institute for Deaf People PA25_HolmesWellcome Trust 203147/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interest in how ageing affects attention is long-standing, although interactions between sensory and attentional processing in older age are not fully understood. Here, we examined interactions between peripheral hearing and selective attention in a spatialised cocktail party listening paradigm, in which three talkers spoke different sentences simultaneously and participants were asked to report the sentence spoken by a talker at a particular location. By comparing a sample of older (N = 61; age = 55-80 years) and younger (N = 58; age = 18-35 years) adults, we show that, as a group, older adults benefit as much as younger adults from preparatory spatial attention. Although, for older adults, this benefit significantly reduces with greater age-related hearing loss. These results demonstrate that older adults with excellent hearing retain the ability to direct spatial selective attention, but this ability deteriorates, in a graded manner, with age-related hearing loss. Thus, reductions in spatial selective attention likely contribute to difficulties communicating in social settings for older adults with age-related hearing loss. Overall, these findings demonstrate a relationship between mild perceptual decline and attention in older age.

Indexed as

AgingAttentionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAuditory PerceptionFemaleHearingHearing LossHumansMaleMiddle AgedSpeech PerceptionYoung AdultAgeingAttentionHearingSpeech perception

Identifiers

PMID39482327
PMCPMC11527878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.