ArticleScientific reports2024
Impaired noise adaptation contributes to speech intelligibility problems in people with hearing loss.
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 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.
- Differential Cognitive Strategies for Speech-in-Noise Perception: A Comparative Study Between Yoga Practitioners and Non-practitioners.Annals of neurosciences · 2026Article
- Baseline Differences in Cochlear Implant Candidates: Bilateral Traditional vs. Expanded Indications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Modulation statistics allow robust prediction of speech recognition accuracy across many words, voices, and natural background sounds.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- The Effects of Broadband Elicitor Duration on Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions and a Psychoacoustic Measure of Gain Reduction.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding speech in noisy settings is harder for hearing-impaired (HI) people than for normal-hearing (NH) people, even when speech is audible. This is often attributed to hearing loss altering the neural encoding of temporal and/or spectral speech cues. Here, we investigated whether this difference may also be due to an impaired ability to adapt to background noise. For 25 adult hearing-aid users with sensorineural hearing loss, speech reception thresholds (SRTs) were measured for natural and tone-vocoded words embedded in speech-shaped noise (SSN). The stimuli were preceded or not by a 1-second adapting SSN precursor. Adaptation was calculated as the difference in SRT between the two precursor conditions. Corresponding data for 28 NH listeners were taken from a previously published study. SRTs were worse for HI listeners, confirming that hearing loss diminishes access to speech acoustic cues. Furthermore, noise adaptation was negatively correlated with the age-controlled hearing loss both for natural (rho=-0.56, N = 52, p < 0.001) and vocoded (rho=-0.45, N = 39, p = 0.002) words. Impaired adaptation contributed up to 10% of the SRT loss in HI listeners. We conclude that HI listeners suffer from poorer speech in noise recognition not only because of impaired access to speech acoustic cues but also because they are less able to adapt to background noise.
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.