ReviewAnnals of biomedical engineering2026
Data-Driven Prediction of Speech-in-Noise Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Machine Learning Models.
Review in Annals of biomedical engineering, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDifficulty understanding speech in noise (SIN) is a major determinant of communication ability and quality of life, affecting individuals with hearing loss as well as some with normal hearing. Data-driven prediction methods offer a promising approach for modeling complex, multidimensional factors underlying speech perception. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated computational approaches for predicting SIN-related outcomes, compared predictive performance across model classes where quantitative synthesis was feasible, and identified methodological factors relevant to model selection, generalizability, and clinical translation.
methodsFollowing PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using machine learning (ML), neural networks, automatic speech recognition (ASR), or auditory model-based approaches to predict, simulate, or evaluate SIN-related outcomes. Quantitative synthesis was performed using random-effects models for studies reporting support vector machine (SVM) or random forest (RF) performance, and between-study heterogeneity was assessed.
resultsEligible studies included traditional ML, neural network, ASR-based, and mechanistic auditory modeling approaches. SVM accuracy pooled at 0.71 and SVM area under the curve at 0.84, while RF accuracy pooled at 0.86 and RF recall at 0.81. Bootstrap estimates were broadly consistent with the primary random-effects estimates, although between-study heterogeneity ranged from moderate to very high across analyses.
conclusionData-driven prediction approaches show promise for predicting SIN-related outcomes, but high heterogeneity precludes identifying a single optimal model. Model selection should reflect the prediction target, data type, sample size, interpretability, and intended use. Current evidence supports proof-of-concept performance more strongly than clinical utility, highlighting the need for larger, standardized, externally validated studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42859950What 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.