Speech Locator In-car Performance Evaluation
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Ontario
-
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada, L5L1J3
- Sonova Innovation Centre Toronto
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Adults (18-99 years) with ≥3 months hearing aid experience
- binaural, symmetric, sensorineural N2 (mild) to N5 (severe) hearing loss
- fluent in English
Exclusion Criteria:
- children/teenagers
- normal hearing or hearing loss exceeding N5 (severe) by 10 dB
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Participants with hearing loss.
|
A receiver-in-canal hearing aid developed by the Study Sponsor used with the investigational adaptive directional microphone strategy that is expected to improve sound quality of speech in a car.
A receiver-in-canal hearing aid developed by the Study Sponsor used with the comparator omnidirectional microphone strategy that is used with the default settings as specified in the manufacturer's fitting software.
A receiver-in-canal hearing aid developed by the Study Sponsor used with the comparator fixed directional microphone strategy that is used with the default settings as specified in the manufacturer's fitting software.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Speech Clarity
Time Frame: Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
The sound quality ratings will be conducted via a computer-based questionnaire that contains sound samples that participants listen to and rate. Sound quality rating scales are continuous and range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) with 5 descriptors unique to the dimension at 5 intervals on the scale (0, 25, 50, 75, 100) Participants will be instructed to "Please rate the clarity of speech". Speech clarity ratings will be measured on a 100-point continuous slider from worst to best (0-Very unclear, 25- Unclear, 50-Slightly clear, 75-Clear, 100-Very clear). Speech clarity ratings are expected to be impacted by how intelligible the speech is. Participants will rate and compare speech clarity between the investigational and comparator features. |
Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
|
Noise Annoyance
Time Frame: Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
The sound quality ratings will be conducted via a computer-based questionnaire that contains sound samples that participants listen to and rate. Sound quality rating scales are continuous and range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) with 5 descriptors unique to the dimension at 5 intervals on the scale (0, 25, 50, 75, 100) Participants will be instructed to "Please rate how annoying the noise is". Noise annoyance ratings will be measured on a 100-point continuous slider from worst to best (0- Extremely annoying, 25-Very annoying, 50-Moderately annoying, 75-Slightly annoying, 100-Not at all annoying). Noise annoyance ratings are expected to be impacted by how bothersome the background noise in the recordings is. Participants will rate and compare noise annoyance between the investigational and comparator features. |
Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
|
Spatialization
Time Frame: Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
The sound quality ratings will be conducted via a computer-based questionnaire that contains sound samples that participants listen to and rate. Sound quality rating scales are continuous and range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) with 5 descriptors unique to the dimension at 5 intervals on the scale (0, 25, 50, 75, 100) Participants will be instructed to "Please rate your confidence that the talker is in [a location]", with the local being either passenger of rear left. Spatialization ratings will be measured on a 100-point continuous slider from worst to best (0-I don't know where the talker is, 25-The talker might be to my [location], 50-The talker is probably to my [location], 75-The talker is to my [location], 100-The talker is definitely to my [location]). Spatialization ratings are expected to be impacted by how well the recordings preserve spatial perception. Participants will rate and compare spatialization between the investigational and comparator features. |
Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
|
Transition Annoyance
Time Frame: Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
The sound quality ratings will be conducted via a computer-based questionnaire that contains sound samples that participants listen to and rate. Sound quality rating scales are continuous and range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) with 5 descriptors unique to the dimension at 5 intervals on the scale (0, 25, 50, 75, 100) Participants will be instructed to "Please rate how annoying the transitions are". Transitions annoyance ratings will be measured on a 100-point continuous slider from worst to best (0-Extremely annoying, 25-Very annoying, 50-Moderately annoying, 75-Slightly annoying, 100-Not at all annoying). Transition annoyance ratings are expected to be influenced by presence of unexpected sounds or transitions that occur in different microphone modes and different listening situations. Participants will rate and compare transition annoyance between the investigational and comparator features. |
Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
|
Overall Impression
Time Frame: Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
The sound quality ratings will be conducted via a computer-based questionnaire that contains sound samples that participants listen to and rate. Sound quality rating scales are continuous and range from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) with 5 descriptors unique to the dimension at 5 intervals on the scale (0, 25, 50, 75, 100) Participants will be instructed to "All things considered, please rate overall preferences". Overall preferences ratings will be measured on a 100-point continuous slider from worst to best (0-Bad, 25-Poor, 50-Fair, 75-Good, 100-Excellent). Overall impression ratings are expected to be impacted by participants' overall preferences for the different stimuli. Participants will rate and compare overall impression between the investigational and comparator features. |
Up to 6 hours over 3 2-hour sessions
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- SRF-459
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Hearing Loss
-
NCT04803279CompletedEar Diseases | Hearing Loss, Conductive | Hearing Loss Mixed | Hearing Disability | Conductive Hearing Loss | Conductive Hearing Loss, Bilateral | Conductive Hearing Loss, Unilateral
-
NCT04427033CompletedHearing Loss | Hearing Loss, Sensorineural | Hearing Loss, Bilateral | Hearing Loss, Conductive | Hearing Loss, Unilateral | Hearing Loss, Mixed
-
NCT05154188Not yet recruitingSensorineural Hearing Loss, Bilateral | Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Severe | Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Profound
-
NCT06058767RecruitingHearing Loss | Hearing Loss, Sensorineural | Hearing Loss, Bilateral | Hearing Loss, Conductive | Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced | Hearing Loss, Unilateral | Hearing Loss, Mixed | Hearing Disorders in Children
-
NCT04145661CompletedCochlear Hearing Loss | Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Bilateral
-
NCT07472023Enrolling by invitationSensorineural Hearing Loss | Tinnitus | Sudden Hearing Loss | Acoustic Trauma | Inner Ear Injury | Noise-Induced Hearing Loss | Vestibular Dysfunction
-
NCT05474963RecruitingHearing Loss, Sudden | Sudden Hearing Loss | Hearing Loss, Idiopathic Sudden Sensorineural | SSNHL(Sudden Sensory Neural Hearing Loss)
-
NCT06699797Active, not recruitingSensorineural Hearing Loss | Sensorineural Hearing Loss (Disorder) | Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Bilateral | Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Severe | Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Profound | Sensori-Neural Deafness
-
NCT01671176CompletedConductive Hearing Loss | Conductive and Sensori-neural Hearing Loss in the Same Ear | Unilateral, Profound Sensori-neural Hearing Loss
-
NCT04601909CompletedHearing Loss, Sensorineural | Presbycusis | Noise Induced Hearing Loss | Sudden Hearing Loss
Clinical Trials on Investigational adaptive directional microphone strategy
-
NCT03771287CompletedHearing Loss, Sensorineural | Hearing Impairment
-
NCT06867380Active, not recruitingHearing Loss, Cochlear | Cochlear Implant Recipients