ArticlePloS one2025
Binaural speech intelligibility for combinations of noise, reverberation, and hearing-aid signal processing.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Baseline Differences in Cochlear Implant Candidates: Bilateral Traditional vs. Expanded Indications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- A Binaural Front End for Speech Intelligibility Models: Application to the Hearing-Aid Speech Perception Index (HASPI).Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Binaural speech intelligibility in rooms is a complex process that is affected by many factors including room acoustics, hearing loss, and hearing aid (HA) signal processing. Intelligibility is evaluated in this paper for a simulated room combined with a simulated hearing aid. The test conditions comprise three spatial configurations of the speech and noise sources, simulated anechoic and concert hall acoustics, three amounts of multitalker babble interference, the hearing status of the listeners, and three degrees of simulated HA processing provided to compensate for the noise and/or hearing loss. The impact of these factors and their interactions is considered for normal-hearing (NH) and hearing-impaired (HI) listeners for sentence stimuli. Both listener groups showed a significant reduction in intelligibility as the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) decreased, and showed a reduction in intelligibility in reverberation when compared to anechoic listening. There was no significant improvement in intelligibility for the NH group for the noise suppression algorithm used here, and no significant improvement in intelligibility for the HI group for more advanced HA processing algorithms as opposed to linear amplification in either of the two acoustic spaces or at any of the three SNRs.
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.