MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172224078 · doi:10.2196/26976

Feasibility of Virtual Reality Audiological Testing: Prospective Study

2021· article· en· W3172224078 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hye Yoon Seol, Soojin Kang, Jihyun Lim, Sung Hwa Hong, Il Joon Moon

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Serious Games · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSamsungMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsAudiologyHeadsetTest (biology)Hearing lossSpeech perceptionPerceptionNoise (video)Pure tone audiometryVirtual realityAudiometryHeadphonesPsychologyMedicineComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It has been noted in the literature that there is a gap between clinical assessment and real-world performance. Real-world conversations entail visual and audio information, yet there are not any audiological assessment tools that include visual information. Virtual reality (VR) technology has been applied to various areas, including audiology. However, the use of VR in speech-in-noise perception has not yet been investigated. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of virtual space (VS) on speech performance and its feasibility to be used as a speech test instrument. We hypothesized that individuals' ability to recognize speech would improve when visual cues were provided. METHODS: A total of 30 individuals with normal hearing and 25 individuals with hearing loss completed pure-tone audiometry and the Korean version of the Hearing in Noise Test (K-HINT) under three conditions-conventional K-HINT (cK-HINT), VS on PC (VSPC), and VS head-mounted display (VSHMD)-at -10 dB, -5 dB, 0 dB, and +5 dB signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). Participants listened to target speech and repeated it back to the tester for all conditions. Hearing aid users in the hearing loss group completed testing under unaided and aided conditions. A questionnaire was administered after testing to gather subjective opinions on the headset, the VSHMD condition, and test preference. RESULTS: Provision of visual information had a significant impact on speech performance between the normal hearing and hearing impaired groups. The Mann-Whitney U test showed statistical significance (P<.05) between the two groups under all test conditions. Hearing aid use led to better integration of audio and visual cues. Statistical significance through the Mann-Whitney U test was observed for -5 dB (P=.04) and 0 dB (P=.02) SNRs under the cK-HINT condition, as well as for -10 dB (P=.007) and 0 dB (P=.04) SNRs under the VSPC condition, between hearing aid and non-hearing aid users. Participants reported positive responses across almost all items on the questionnaire except for the weight of the headset. Participants preferred a test method with visual imagery, but found the headset to be heavy. CONCLUSIONS: Findings are in line with previous literature that showed that visual cues were beneficial for communication. This is the first study to include hearing aid users with a more naturalistic stimulus and a relatively simple test environment, suggesting the feasibility of VR audiological testing in clinical practice.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Serious GamesSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207