MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416666782 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-25801-y

Brain benefits of deep learning-based noise management in experienced hearing aid users using functional near infrared spectroscopy

2025· article· en· W4416666782 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan M. Vaisberg, Carmen Dang, Yan Jiang, Jinyu Qian, Frank Russo

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityToronto Metropolitan UniversityAlchemy (Canada)
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHearing aidActive listeningFunctional near-infrared spectroscopyNoise (video)Auditory cortexNeuroimagingPrefrontal cortexMicrophone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing interest in using neuroimaging to understanding listening effort in individuals with hearing loss, with a particular focus on how innovative hearing aid features impact listening effort. This study used functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to investigate the neural basis of listening effort in experienced hearing aid users. This study evaluated the impact of a new deep learning-based noise management hearing aid feature on cerebral blood oxygenation, with the expectation that it would be associated with less oxygenation in the left prefrontal cortex compared to a standard quiet-listening hearing aid program. Twenty-six experienced hearing aid users repeated sentence-final words from sentences presented in noise while wearing individually prescribed hearing aids in two conditions: a standard-listening program with an omnidirectional microphone setting and a DNN-listening program combining directional microphones with a deep-neural-network-based noise management algorithm. Listening accuracy, subjective listening effort ratings, and prefrontal oxygenation via fNIRS were measured throughout testing. As expected, the DNN-listening program was associated with higher listening accuracy, lower subjective listening effort ratings, and lower fNIRS-measured oxygenation in the left prefrontal cortex relative to the standard-listening program. The utility of fNIRS for hearing aid research and the interaction of listening effort and other cognitive processes are discussed further.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation→French-language works237,207→