Effects of earlens lens placement on sound field thresholds, tympanometric measurements and wideband acoustic immittance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective The Earlens is a direct-drive hearing device consisting of a lens which physically displaces the umbo to achieve appropriate gain. The objective is to determine the clinical acceptability of clinical immittance measurements in Earlens wearers.Design Controlled before-after within-subjects repeated measures study.Study sample Data is reported for measurements obtained on 15 subjects (average age of 72.2 years) with data from 30 ears.Results There was a small effect of lens placement on sound field thresholds in most subjects. The largest damping effect of 4 dB was observed at 1000 Hz. An average reduction of 0.17 mL was identified in compliance following lens placement (p < 0.05). An effect of the lens on power absorbance obtained at ambient and peak pressure was found. The lens resulted in an increase in power absorbance at low frequencies (below 500 Hz) and a decrease in the mid to high-frequency range of approximately 500–3500 Hz (p < 0.05).Conclusions Lens wear had a small effect on audiometric thresholds and tympanometry for most patients. Clinicians who use compliance and power absorbance should take into consideration lens effects on these measurements. Additional work is required to develop clinical normative ranges of these measures for wearers of the Earlens.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".