ArticleJournal of otology2026
The Use of Electrophysiological GIN Test in Diagnosing Temporal Resolution Problems in Patients with Sensorineural Hearing Loss.
Article in Journal of otology, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the clinical validity of Acoustic Change Complex (ACC) measurements for diagnosing temporal resolution deficits in individuals with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Methods: This study included 100 participants, divided into two groups: 50 adults with normal peripheral hearing (NH), who served as the control group, and 50 adults with bilateral mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). All participants completed both behavioral and electrophysiological Gap-in-Noise (GIN) assessments. Results: Both behavioral and electrophysiological Gap-in-Noise (GIN) assessments demonstrated significantly elevated thresholds in the SNHL group compared with the NH group. Furthermore, electrophysiological GIN thresholds were consistently lower (better) than behavioral GIN thresholds in both groups. A strong positive correlation was observed between behavioral and electrophysiological GIN thresholds. The electrophysiological GIN threshold demonstrated a sensitivity of 84% and a specificity of 90% for identifying temporal resolution deficits. Conclusion: These findings indicate that the electrophysiological Gap-in-Noise (GIN) test is a reliable objective measure for evaluating temporal resolution. Moreover, it may be particularly useful in clinical situations where behavioral assessment is not feasible.
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.