ArticleTrends in hearing
Individual Differences Underlying Preference for Processing Delay in Open-Fit Hearing Aids.
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hearing Aids: What Works Well and What Can Be Improved.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2026Review
- Article
- 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In open-fit digital hearing aids (HAs), the processing delay influences comb-filter effects that arise from the interaction of the processed HA sound with the unprocessed direct sound. The current study investigated potential relations between preferred processing delay, spectral and temporal processing abilities, and self-reported listening habits. Ten listeners with normal hearing and 20 listeners with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing impairments participated. Using a HA simulator, delay preference was assessed with a paired-comparison task, three types of stimuli, and five processing delays (0, 0.5, 2, 5, and 10 ms). Spectral processing was assessed with a spectral ripple discrimination (SRD) task. Temporal processing was assessed with a gap detection task. Self-reported listening habits were assessed using a shortened version of the 'sound preference and hearing habits' questionnaire. A linear mixed-effects model showed a strong effect of processing delay on preference scores (
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.