ArticleTrends in hearing
Arabic Digits-in-Noise Tests: Relations to Hearing Loss and Comparison of Diotic and Antiphasic Versions.
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 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.
- The role of socio-economic and lifestyle factors in hearing function in middle-aged adults.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Non-Auditory Participant Characteristics Influence Digit-Perception Performance: Evidence From Tasks Varying in Masker Type and Spatial Cues.Trends in hearingArticle
- Leveraging Monaural Exposures to Reveal Early Effects of Noise: Evidence from Police Radio Ear-Piece Use.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study set out to acquire validation data for Arabic versions of the Digits-in-Noise (DIN) test, measured using browser-based software suitable for home hearing screening. DIN and pure-tone audiometric (PTA) thresholds were obtained from a sample of 155 Arabic-speaking participants, varying widely in age and in degree and type of hearing loss. DIN thresholds were measured using both diotic and antiphasic stimuli, with the goal of determining whether antiphasic testing provides superior prediction of poorer-ear hearing loss. A comprehensive study protocol was publicly pre-registered via the Open Science Framework. Both types of DIN threshold correlate with poorer-ear PTA thresholds after controlling for age, but the correlation is significantly stronger for antiphasic than diotic stimuli. Antiphasic DIN thresholds increase more steeply than diotic DIN thresholds as poorer-ear PTA thresholds increase, and are superior binary classifiers of hearing loss. Combined with previous results based on DIN data measured in participants' homes, the present findings suggest that the browser-based Arabic DIN test may be effective in remote hearing screening, when combined with antiphasic digit presentation.
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.