An Exploration of the Memory Performance in Older Adult Hearing Aid Users on the Integrated Digit-in-Noise Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to preliminarily investigate the associations between performance on the integrated Digit-in-Noise Test (iDIN) and performance on measures of general cognition and working memory (WM). The study recruited 81 older adult hearing aid users between 60 and 95 years of age with bilateral moderate to severe hearing loss. The Chinese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Basic (MoCA-BC) was used to screen older adults for mild cognitive impairment. Speech reception thresholds (SRTs) were measured using 2- to 5-digit sequences of the Mandarin iDIN. The differences in SRT between five-digit and two-digit sequences (SRT 5−2 ), and between five-digit and three-digit sequences (SRT 5−3 ), were used as indicators of memory performance. The results were compared to those from the Digit Span Test and Corsi Blocks Tapping Test, which evaluate WM and attention capacity. SRT 5−2 and SRT 5−3 demonstrated significant correlations with the three cognitive function tests ( rs ranging from −.705 to −.528). Furthermore, SRT 5−2 and SRT 5−3 were significantly higher in participants who failed the MoCA-BC screening compared to those who passed. The findings show associations between performance on the iDIN and performance on memory tests. However, further validation and exploration are needed to fully establish its effectiveness and efficacy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".