ArticleTrends in hearing
Remote Matrix Sentence Test on Uncalibrated Consumer Devices: Test-Retest Reliability and Laboratory Agreement in Normal Hearing.
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the impact of uncalibrated consumer hardware on the outcomes of the German Matrix Sentence Test (GMST) in a remote setting. Speech-in-noise tests like the MST are relevant in audiology, as they better reflect everyday listening conditions compared to pure-tone audiometry. Due to their suprathreshold signal presentation and robustness against calibration offsets, they are particularly suitable for remote testing. It is unclear, however, if a sensitive and efficient test like the MST exhibits the same robustness against uncontrolled conditions in remote testing with uncalibrated consumer devices. This motivates the systematic assessment of the online MST's reliability and its agreement with laboratory administration, conducted in normal-hearing participants using the browser-based platform "Virtual Hearing Clinic" (VHC). Twenty normal hearing participants completed the test in a randomized sequence: once in a lab with calibrated equipment and twice remotely via the VHC using uncalibrated consumer devices (smartphones, laptops, headphones).Resultsrevealed no significant influence of headphone type, test environment, or pure-tone average. The remote condition demonstrated high test-retest reliability (r = 0.82) and strong correlation with lab-based measurements (r = 0.78). A mean bias of 0.29 dB in speech recognition thresholds was observed with slightly better performance in the lab, though not statistically significant (p = 0.15). Overall, results demonstrate that the MST, when implemented remotely and using uncalibrated consumer hardware, yields results of accuracy and reliability comparable to those obtained in the lab for normal hearing, supporting further applications of remote hearing assessments with optimized test materials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.