Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Henshaw, Helen; Ferguson, Melanie A (2013)
Publisher: BioMed Central
Journal: Trials
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Working memory training, Medicine (miscellaneous), Cognition, Hearing aid, Working memory, Study Protocol, Hearing loss, Speech perception, Pharmacology (medical), Speech intelligibility, Cognitive training

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: otorhinolaryngologic diseases
Background One in ten people aged between 55 to 74 years have a significant hearing impairment in their better hearing ear (as defined by audiometric hearing thresholds). However, it is becoming increasingly clear that the challenges faced by older listeners cannot be explained by the audiogram alone. The ability for people with hearing loss to use cognition to support speech perception allows for compensation of the degraded auditory input. This in turn offers promise for new cognitive-based rehabilitative interventions. Working memory is known to be highly associated with language comprehension and recent evidence has shown significant generalization of learning from trained working memory tasks to improvements in sentence-repetition skills of children with severe to profound hearing loss. This evidence offers support for further investigation into the potential benefits of working memory training to improve speech perception abilities in other hearing impaired populations. Methods/Design This is a double-blind randomized active controlled trial aiming to assess whether a program of working memory training results in improvements in untrained measures of cognition, speech perception and self-reported hearing abilities in adult hearing aid users (aged 50 to 74 years) with mild-to-moderate hearing loss, compared with an active control group who receive a placebo version of the working memory training program. Discussion The present study aims to generate high-quality preliminary evidence for the efficacy of working memory training for adults with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss who are existing hearing aid users. This trial addresses a number of gaps in the published literature assessing training interventions for people with hearing loss, and in the general literature surrounding working memory training, such as the inclusion of an active control group, participant and tester blinding, and increased transparency in reporting. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01892007. Date of registration: 27 June 2013.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Davis A, Smith P, Ferguson M, Stephens D, Gianopoulos I: Acceptability, benefit and costs of early screening for hearing disability: a study of potential screening tests and models. Health Technol Assess 2007, 11.
    • 2. Cherry EC: Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and with two ears. J Acoust Soc Am 1953, 25:975-979.
    • 3. Kiessling J, Pichora-Fuller MK, Gatehouse S, Stephens D, Arlinger S, Chisolm T, Davis AC, Erber NP, Hickson L, Holmes A, Rosenhall U, von Wedel H: Candidature for and delivery of audiological services: special needs of older people. Int J Audiol 2003, 42:S92-S101.
    • 4. Pichora-Fuller MK: Cognitive aging and auditory information processing. Int J Audiol 2003, 42:2S26-2S32.
    • 5. Pichora-Fuller MK, Singh G: Effects of age on auditory and cognitive processing: implications for hearing aid fitting and audiologic rehabilitation. Trends Amplif 2006, 10:29-59.
    • 6. Edwards B: The future of hearing aid technology. Trends Amplif 2007, 11:31-45.
    • 7. Amitay S, Hawkey DJC, Moore DR: Auditory frequency discrimination learning is affected by stimulus variability. Percept Psychophys 2005, 67:691-698.
    • 8. Halliday LF, Taylor JL, Edmondson-Jones AM, Moore DR: Frequency discrimination learning in children. J Acoust Soc Am 2008, 123:4393-4402.
    • 9. Henshaw H, Ferguson MA: Efficacy of individual computer-based auditory training for people with hearing loss: a systematic review of the evidence. PLoS One 2013, 8:e62836.
    • 10. Moore DR, Halliday L, Amitay S: Use of auditory learning to manage listening problems in children. Philosophical Trans Roy Soc B: Biol Sci 2009, 364:409-420.
    • 11. Anderson S, White-Schwoch T, Parbery-Clark A, Kraus N: Reversal of age-related neural timing delays with training. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2013, 110:4357-4362.
    • 12. Ferguson M, Henshaw H, Clark D, Moore D: Benefits of phoneme discrimination training in a randomized controlled trial of 50-74 year olds with mild hearing loss. Ear Hear. In press.
    • 13. Engle RW, Kane MJ: Executive attention, working memory capacity, and a two-factor theory of cognitive control. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Volume 44. Waltham, MA: Academic Press; 2003:145-199.
    • 14. Barrouillet P, Bernardin S, Camos V: Time constraints and resource sharing in adults' working memory spans. J Exp Psychol Gen 2004, 133:83-100.
    • 15. Miyake A, Friedman NP, Emerson MJ, Witzki AH, Howerter A, Wager TD: The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “Frontal Lobe” tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cogn Psychol 2000, 41:49-100.
    • 16. Miyake A, Shah P: Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1999.
    • 17. Akeroyd MA: Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. Int J Audiol 2008, 47:53-71.
    • 18. Rönnberg J, Rudner M, Foo C, Lunner T: Cognition counts: a working memory system for ease of language understanding (ELU). Int J Audiol 2008, 47:S99-S105.
    • 19. Kraus N: Biological impact of music and software-based auditory training. J Commun Disord 2012, 45:403-410.
    • 20. Edwards B: The Effect of Hearing Loss and Hearing Aids on Cognition. Charlotte, NC: American Academy of Audiology Convention, April 2-4; 2008.
    • 21. Lunner T, Rudner M, Rönnberg J: Cognition and hearing aids. Scand J Psychol 2009, 50:395-403.
    • 22. Pichora-Fuller MK, Schneider BA, Daneman M: How young and old adults listen to and remember speech in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1995, 97:593-608.
    • 23. Schneider BA, Daneman M, Murphy DR, Kwong-See S: Listening to discourse in distracting settings: the effects of gaining. Psychol Aging 2000, 15:110-125.
    • 24. Kricos PB: Audiological management of older adults with hearing loss and compromised cognitive/psychoacoustic auditory processing capabiliites. Trends Amplif 2006, 10:1-28.
    • 25. Pichora-Fuller MK: Audition and cognition. Where lab meets clinic. ASHA Leader 2008, 13:14-17.
    • 26. Brehmer Y, Westerberg H, Backman L: Working-memory training in younger and older adults: training gains, transfer, and maintenance. Front Hum Neurosci 2012, 6:1-7.
    • 27. Kronenberger WG, Pisoni DB, Henning SC, Colson BG, Hazzard LM: Working memory training for children with cochlear implants: a pilot study. J Speech Lang Hear Res 2010, 54:1182-1196.
    • 28. Action on Hearing Loss: Statistics about deafness and hearing. http://www.actiononhearingloss.org.uk/your-hearing/about-deafness-andhearing-loss/statistics.aspx.
    • 29. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, Laupacis A, Gøtzsche PC, Krleža-Jerić K, Hróbjartsson A, Mann H, Dickersin K, Berlin JA, Doré CJ, Parulekar WR, Summerskill WS, Groves T, Schulz KF, Sox HC, Rockhold FW, Rennie D, Moher D: SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 2013, 158:200-207.
    • 30. British Society of Audiology: Pure-tone air- and bone-conduction threshold audiometry with and without masking. http://www.thebsa. org.uk/docs/Guidelines/BSA_RP_PTA_FINAL_24Sept11.pdf.
    • 31. Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NS, Bédirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I, Cummings JL, Chertkow H: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005, 53:695-699.
    • 32. Gatehouse S, Naylor G, Elberling C: Linear and nonlinear hearing aid fittings-1. Patterns of benefit. Int J Audiol 2006, 45:130-152.
    • 33. Moore DR, Rosenberg JF, Coleman JS: Discrimination training of phonemic contrasts enhances phonological processing in mainstream school children. Brain Lang 2005, 94:72-85.
    • 34. Heinrich A, Bruhn K, Hawkins S: Young and old listeners' perceptions of speech in a background of English- and foreign-accented babble. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Psychophysics. Edited by Algom D, Zakay D, Chajut E, Shaki S, Mama Y, Shakuf V. Raanana, Israel; 2011.
    • 35. Bilger RC, Nuetzel JM, Rabinowitz WM, Rezeczkowski C: Standardization of a test of speech perception in noise. J Speech Hear Res 1984, 27:32-48.
    • 36. Hazan V, Messaoud-Galusi S, Rosen S, Nouwens S, Shakespeare B: Speech perception abilities of adults with dyslexia: is there any evidence for a true defecit? J Speech Lang Hear Res 2009, 52:1510-1529.
    • 37. Bolia RS, Nelson WT, Ericson MA, Simpson BD: A speech corpus for multitalker communications research. J Acoust Soc Am 2000, 107:1065-1066.
    • 38. Wechsler D: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. 3rd edition. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation; 1997.
    • 39. Zhang YX, Barry JG, Moore DR, Amitay S: A new test of attention in listening (TAIL) predicts auditory performance. PLoS One 2012, 7:1-12.
    • 40. Ventry IM, Woods RW, Rubin M, Hill W: Most comfortable loudness for pure tones, noise, and speech. J Acoust Soc Am 1971, 49:1805-1813.
    • 41. Robertson IH, Ward T, Ridgeway V, Nimmo-Smith I: The Test of Everyday Attention. Thames Valley Test Company: Bury St, Edmunds, UK; 1994.
    • 42. Sorqvist P, Ljungberg JK, Ljung R: A sub-process view of working memory capacity: evidence from effects of speech on prose memory. Memory 2010, 18:310-326.
    • 43. Howard CS, Munro KJ, Plack CJ: Listening effort at signal-to-noise ratios that are typical of the school classroom. Int J Audiol 2010, 49:928-932.
    • 44. Boothroyd A: Developments in speech audiometry. Br J Audiol 1968, 2:3-10.
    • 45. Gatehouse S: Glasgow hearing aid benefit profile: derivation and validation of client-centred outcome measures for hearing aid services. J Am Acad Audiol 1999, 10:80-103.
    • 46. Newman CW, Weinstein BE: The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly as a measure of hearing aid benefit. Amplification Aural Rehabil 1988, 9:81-85.
    • 47. Altman D: Practical Statistics for Medical Research. London, UK: Chapman & Hall; 1991.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article