ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2025
Establishing New Pediatric Thresholds for Digits-In-Noise Testing.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To determine if specific pediatric diagnostic criteria exist to determine the presence of conductive hearing loss (CHL) digits in noise (DIN) tablet testing in children. Methods: One hundred forty nine children aged 3-18 underwent a conventional audiogram, followed by an otolaryngologist examination and tablet-based digits in noise (DIN) testing. DIN testing consisted of diotic (same-phased stimuli) and antiphasic (out-of-phase stimuli) digits-in-noise testing on a HearX Samsung Galaxy tablet with over-the-ear headphones, for a total of 298 measurements. Children were included if they could repeat the numbers 1-10 in English, and excluded if they could not complete testing or could not tolerate ear-level examination. Results: The signal-to-noise ratios of all participants were correlated with the hearing diagnosis determined by sound booth audiometric evaluation. Two unique parameters were identified that allowed us to identify conductive hearing loss (CHL) in the pediatric population with a high positive predictive value (76% and 95%) and acceptable specificity (81% and 98%), but poor sensitivity (39% and 22%). Conclusion: Pediatric DIN testing did not delineate CHL from NH as cleanly as adult data. Trends were noted, but improvements need to be made to sensitivity prior to utilizing DIN as a screening tool for pediatric CHL. Level of Evidence: 2.
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.