Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39636386›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2024

Older adults' recognition of medical terminology in hospital noise.

Tessa Bent, Melissa Baese-Berk, Brian Puckett, Erica Ryherd, Sydney Perry, Natalie A Manley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 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

6 authors.

Tessa BentDepartment of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Indiana University, Tessa Bent, 2631 E. Discovery Parkway, Bloomington, IN, 47408, USA. tbent@iu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-7604-1835
Melissa Baese-BerkDepartment of Linguistics, University of Chicago, Chicago, USA.
Brian PuckettDurham School of Architectural Engineering and Construction, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA.
Erica RyherdDurham School of Architectural Engineering and Construction, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA.
Sydney PerryDepartment of Speech, Language and Hearing Sciences, Indiana University, Tessa Bent, 2631 E. Discovery Parkway, Bloomington, IN, 47408, USA.
Natalie A ManleyDivision of Geriatrics, Gerontology and Palliative Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center Department of Internal Medicine, Omaha, USA.

Funding

James S. McDonnell Foundation https://doi.org/10.37717/2021-3028
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Word identification accuracy is modulated by many factors including linguistic characteristics of words (frequent vs. infrequent), listening environment (noisy vs. quiet), and listener-related differences (older vs. younger). Nearly, all studies investigating these factors use high-familiarity words and noise signals that are either energetic maskers (e.g., white noise) or informational maskers composed of competing talkers (e.g., multitalker babble). Here, we expand on these findings by examining younger and older listeners' speech-in-noise perception for words varying in both frequency and familiarity within a simulated hospital noise that has important non-speech information. The method was inspired by the real-world challenges aging patients can face in understanding less familiar medical terminology used by healthcare professionals in noisy hospital environments. Word familiarity data from older and young adults were collected for 800 medically related terms. Familiarity ratings were highly correlated between the two age groups. Older adults' transcription accuracy for sentences with medical terminology that vary in their familiarity and frequency was assessed across four listening conditions: hospital noise, speech-shaped noise, amplitude-modulated speech-shaped noise, and quiet. Listeners were less accurate in noise conditions than in a quiet condition and were more impacted by hospital noise than either speech-shaped noise. Sentences with low-familiarity and low-frequency medical words combined with hospital noise were particularly detrimental for older adults compared to younger adults. The results impact our theoretical understanding of speech perception in noise and highlight real-world consequences of older adults' difficulties with speech-in-noise and specifically noise containing competing, non-speech information.

Indexed as

NoiseRecognition, PsychologySpeech PerceptionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAgingFemaleHospitalsHumansMaleMiddle AgedTerminology as TopicYoung AdultHospital noiseIntelligibilityLexical characteristicsOlder adultsSpeech perception

Identifiers

PMID39636386
PMCPMC11621266

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.