首页> 外文OA文献 >Effects of hearing impairment and hearing aid amplification on listening effort - a systematic review
【2h】

Effects of hearing impairment and hearing aid amplification on listening effort - a systematic review

机译:听力障碍和助听器放大对听力的影响-系统评价

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Objectives: To undertake a systematic review of available evidence on the effect of hearing impairment and hearing-aid amplification on listening effort. Two research questions were addressed: Q1) does hearing impairment affect listening effort? and Q2) can hearing aid amplification affect listening effort during speech comprehension?udDesign: English language articles were identified through systematic searches in PubMed, EMBASE, Cinahl, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO from inception to August 2014. References of eligible studies were checked. The Population, Intervention, Control, Outcomes and Study design (PICOS) strategy was used to create inclusion criteria for relevance. It was not feasible to apply a meta-analysis of the results from comparable studies. For the articles identified as relevant, a quality rating, based on the 2011 Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group guidelines, was carried out to judge the reliability and confidence of the estimated effects.udResults: The primary search produced 7017 unique hits using the key-words: hearing aids OR hearing impairment AND listening effort OR perceptual effort OR ease of listening. Of these, 41 articles fulfilled the PICOS selection criteria of: experimental work on hearing impairment OR hearing aid technologies AND listening effort OR fatigue during speech perception. The methods applied in those articles were categorized into subjective, behavioral and physiological assessment of listening effort. For each study, the statistical analysis addressing research question Q1 and/or Q2 was extracted. In 7 articles more than one measure of listening effort was provided. Evidence relating to Q1 was provided by 21 articles that reported 41 relevant findings. Evidence relating to Q2 was provided by 27 articles that reported 56 relevant findings. The quality of evidence on both research questions (Q1 and Q2) was very low, according to the GRADE Working Group guidelines. We tested the statistical evidence across studies with non-parametric tests. The testing revealed only one consistent effect across studies, namely that listening effort was higher for hearing-impaired listeners compared to normal-hearing listeners (Q1) as measured by EEG measures. For all other studies the evidence across studies failed to reveal consistent effects on listening effort.udConclusion: In summary, we could only identify scientific evidence from physiological measurement methods, suggesting that hearing impairment increases listening effort during speech perception (Q1). There was no systematic finding across studies indicating that hearing-aid amplification decreases listening effort (Q2). In general, there were large differences in the study population, the control groups and conditions, and the outcome measures applied between the studies included in this review. The results of this review indicate that published listening effort studies lack consistency, lack standardization across studies, and have insufficient statistical power. The findings underline the need for a common conceptual framework for listening effort to address the current shortcomings.
机译:目标:对听力障碍和助听器放大对听觉努力的影响进行现有证据的系统评价。解决了两个研究问题:问题1)听力障碍会影响听力吗?和Q2)助听器放大功能能否影响语音理解过程中的听力? udDesign:从开始到2014年8月,通过在PubMed,EMBASE,Cinahl,Cochrane图书馆和PsycINFO中进行系统搜索来识别英语文章。检查了符合条件的研究的参考文献。人口,干预,控制,结果和研究设计(PICOS)策略用于创建相关性的纳入标准。对可比研究的结果进行荟萃分析是不可行的。对于确定为相关的文章,根据2011年建议分级评估,发展和评估(GRADE)工作组指南进行了质量评级,以判断估计效果的可靠性和可信度。 ud结果:主要搜索使用以下关键字产生了7017个独特的热门歌曲:助听器或听力障碍与听力,感知力或听力。其中有41篇文章符合PICOS的选择标准:关于听力障碍或助听器技术以及语音感知过程中听力或疲劳的实验工作。这些文章中使用的方法分为听觉主观,行为和生理评估。对于每个研究,都提取了针对研究问题Q1和/或Q2的统计分析。在7篇文章中,提供了一种以上的倾听努力度量。与Q1相关的证据由21篇文章提供,报告了41项相关发现。 27篇文章提供了与第二季度相关的证据,其中报道了56项相关发现。根据GRADE工作组指南,这两个研究问题(第一季度和第二季度)的证据质量都非常低。我们使用非参数检验对各项研究中的统计证据进行了检验。测试显示,在所有研究中,只有一种一致的效果,即,通过EEG测评,与正常听力的听众(Q1)相比,听力受损的听众的听觉努力程度更高。对于所有其他研究,研究中的证据未能揭示出对听觉努力的一致影响。在研究中没有系统的发现表明助听器的放大会减少听觉的努力(Q2)。一般而言,本研究包括的研究之间,研究人群,对照组和条件以及所应用的结果指标存在很大差异。这篇评论的结果表明,已发表的听力努力研究缺乏一致性,缺乏跨研究的标准化,并且统计能力不足。研究结果强调需要一个共同的概念框架来倾听努力以解决当前的缺陷。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号