You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Sensitivity to temporal fine structure and hearing-aid outcomes in older adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2014.00007 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elvira Perez, Abby McCormack, Barrie A. Edmonds |
| Abstract |
Objective: To investigate the effect of sensitivity to temporal fine structure (TFS) on subjective measures of hearing aid outcome. Design: Prior to receiving hearing aids, participants completed a test to assess sensitivity to TFS and two self-assessment questionnaires; the Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile (GHABP), and the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of hearing (SSQ-A). Follow-up appointments, comprised three self-assessment questionnaires; the GHABP, the SSQ-B, and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aid Outcomes (IOI-HA). Study sample: 75 adults were recruited from direct referral clinics. Results: Two thirds of participants were found to have good sensitivity to TFS; listeners with good sensitivity to TFS rated their hearing abilities higher at pre-fitting (SSQ-A) than those with poor sensitivity to TFS. At follow-up, participants with good sensitivity to TFS showed a smaller improvement on SSQ-B over listeners with poor sensitivity to TFS. Among the questionnaires, only the SSQ showed greater sensitivity to measure subjective differences between listeners with good and poor sensitivity to TFS. Conclusions: The clinical identification of a patient's ability to process TFS information at an early stage in the treatment pathway could prove useful in managing expectations about hearing aid outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 20% |
| Psychology | 7 | 13% |
| Engineering | 6 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 17 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 April 2018.
All research outputs
#8,261,756
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,239
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,461
of 319,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#25
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,271 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.