ArticleNoise & health
'Better Ear' Self-Perception Aligns with Audiometry: Insights from Machine-Learning Modeling.
Article in Noise & health. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAccurate self-perception of interaural hearing asymmetry is crucial for clinical decision-making and communication strategies, yet the relationship between objective audiometric patterns and subjective awareness remains poorly characterized. Using nationally representative data from the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, this study employed a machine learning approach to model the probability that an individual's self-reported "better-hearing" ear matches the audiometrically defined one.
methodsA Light Gradient Boosting Machine classifier was trained exclusively on objective measures-ear-specific pure-tone averages (PTA) and interaural asymmetry metrics-to predict correct subjective identification.
resultsThe model demonstrated robust performance on a held-out test set, with an accuracy of 0.85, precision of 0.84, recall of 0.98, an F1-score of 0.91, and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.83. Explainable artificial intelligence analysis revealed that the absolute magnitude of interaural PTA asymmetry was the dominant predictor of correct self-report, while the signed direction of asymmetry contributed minimally.
conclusionThe results indicate that subjective awareness is strongly tied to the size of the hearing difference between ears rather than its direction and becomes more reliable with greater asymmetry. These findings indicate that a simple "better ear" self-report item captures meaningful audiometric information, supporting its potential use in clinical triage and public health surveillance, while also highlighting the need for caution in cases of mild asymmetry where misclassification is more likely.
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.