AzTrials
AzTrials

Hearing Loss, CochlearNCT07287774

Evaluating a Deep Neural Noise-Reduction Algorithm for Hearing Aids

A study testing Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Off, Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Low and Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - High in people with Hearing Loss, Cochlear, run by Purdue University at 1 site in United States.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This study is designed to understand how different hearing-aid noise-reduction technologies affect a listener's ability to hear speech in noisy environments. Participants will listen to speech at several background-noise levels while trying different processing settings. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Hearing Loss, Cochlear
What is being tested?
Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Off, Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Low and Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - High
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
50 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
16 Oct 2025to 30 Apr 2026
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • A hearing aid candidate with mild-to-moderate cochlear hearing loss, based on audiometric profile (at least 20 dB of hearing loss at 2000 Hz, with progressively worse hearing levels at higher frequencies).

Who cannot join

  • Normal hearing
  • Severe or profound hearing loss
  • Conductive hearing loss
  • Neural hearing loss

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

United States1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Purdue University

    West Lafayette, Indiana, 47905

    Joshua Alexander, Ph.D., 765-494-5956, PurdueEarLab@gmail.com

    Recruiting

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Evaluating a Deep Neural Noise-Reduction Algorithm for Hearing Aids in Varying Signal-to-Noise Conditions

This study is designed to understand how different hearing-aid noise-reduction technologies affect a listener's ability to hear speech in noisy environments. Participants will listen to speech at several background-noise levels while trying different processing settings. By comparing performance across these conditions, the study aims to identify which types of noise reduction improve speech intelligibility the most. We expect that some noise-reduction strategies will help listeners understand speech better than others, especially in more difficult listening situations.

Read the detailed description
  • STUDY DESCRIPTION *

Hearing in noisy environments is one of the most common challenges faced by individuals with hearing loss, and even people with normal hearing often struggle to understand speech in situations such as restaurants, classrooms, and busy public spaces. Modern hearing aids use advanced digital signal-processing strategies, especially deep neural network (DNN)-based noise reduction, to improve speech intelligibility in these difficult listening situations. However, these technologies vary widely in how well they work, and their benefits can depend on factors such as noise level, background type, and an individual's degree of hearing loss. This study examines how different noise-reduction strategies affect a listener's ability to understand speech across a range of real-world listening conditions. A monaural, omnidirectional configuration is to isolate single-microphone noise-reduction strategies without the benefit of directional hearing-aid processing. The research compares several processing modes, each representing a distinct noise-reduction algorithm or signal-processing approach. These modes include stronger and weaker forms of noise reduction as well as "off" conditions with no noise-reduction processing applied. Participants will complete listening tasks at several input signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), representing easier and more difficult levels of background noise. All participants experience each condition in a controlled, fully counterbalanced order to reduce learning effects and bias.

  • OVERVIEW OF THE LISTENING TASKS *

During the study, listeners complete speech-understanding tasks using the dual-sentence paradigm, a testing method developed to better reflect the real-world cognitive load of listening in noise. Traditional speech tests typically ask a listener to repeat a single sentence at a time. While useful, these single-sentence tasks often underestimate the difficulty of everyday listening, which requires people to monitor, remember, and respond to multiple pieces of information at once. The dual-sentence paradigm addresses this gap by presenting two sentences back-to-back within the same trial. The participant hears Sentence A, followed immediately by Sentence B, spoken by different talkers. The participant is asked to immediately repeat the first sentence and then type the second sentence.

This structure increases cognitive demand by requiring the listener to hold more spoken information in working memory while simultaneously dealing with background noise. The approach provides a more sensitive measure of how signal-processing strategies affect not only audibility but also real-world listening effort, memory load, and speech comprehension.

  • HOW NOISE-REDUCTION STRATEGIES ARE EVALUATED *

To evaluate the effects of each noise-reduction setting, participants complete the dual-sentence task at several SNRs - for example, easier (positive) SNRs where speech is louder than the noise, and harder (negative) SNRs where noise competes strongly with speech. Each noise-reduction mode is tested at every SNR, producing a full set of performance data for every combination of algorithm strength and noise difficulty. Speech understanding is measured using standard scoring methods for sentence recall tasks. Participants' responses are recorded, and accuracy is scored based on the number of keywords correctly repeated for each sentence. This allows the research team to quantify how different processing strategies influence speech intelligibility and cognitive load under controlled listening conditions.

  • SCIENTIFIC RATIONALE AND EXPECTED CONTRIBUTIONS *

Deep neural network-based noise-reduction strategies have emerged in many commercial hearing devices, but their performance can vary depending on training data, model complexity, and how aggressively the noise is reduced. Some settings may improve intelligibility but distort the speech signal; others may reduce noise but introduce processing delays or artifacts that affect listener comfort. By systematically comparing multiple noise-reduction algorithms under identical conditions, this study aims to map how different strategies alter both speech understanding and listening difficulty. Findings from this research can help guide the development of more effective, listener-centered noise-reduction approaches for hearing aids. The results may also improve clinical recommendations by identifying which algorithm strengths work best in different noise environments.

  • BROADER SIGNIFICANCE *

The ability to communicate in noisy surroundings has profound effects on social participation, work performance, and quality of life. Many hearing aid users continue to report difficulty in noisy environments despite technological advancements. A more detailed understanding of how listeners respond to different noise-reduction strategies, especially under the cognitively demanding dual-sentence paradigm, may help manufacturers design more supportive features and may assist clinicians in tailoring fittings to an individual's daily listening needs.

This study ultimately seeks to support future improvements in hearing-aid design and programming by providing objective evidence on how advanced noise-reduction algorithms affect real-world speech understanding.

Being tested
Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Off, Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Low, Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - High, Negative SNR, Zero signal-to-noise ratio
Keywords
hearing aids, noise reduction, speech understanding, listening in noise, speech perception, hearing loss, background noise
Medical subject headings
Hearing Loss, Sensorineural, Hearing Loss

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - OffDevice

    No neural noise suppression applied. Baseline processing condition.

  • Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - LowDevice

    Neural noise suppression using the lower-strength algorithm parameters.

  • Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - HighDevice

    Neural noise suppression using the higher-strength algorithm parameters.

  • Negative SNROther

    Noise levels higher than speech levels

  • Zero signal-to-noise ratioOther

    Equal speech and noise levels

  • Positive SNROther

    Speech levels higher than noise levels

Study groups in NCT07287774
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Hearing Aid Noise-Reduction ProcessingExperimentalParticipants complete all noise-reduction conditions (Off, Low, High) at all tested signal-to-noise ratios in a within-subject crossover design.
Receives: Device: Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Off; Device: Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Low; Device: Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - High
Signal-to-Noise RatioExperimentalRelative speech and noise levels
Receives: Other: Negative SNR; Other: Zero signal-to-noise ratio; Other: Positive SNR

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Immediate Speech Recall

    Accuracy of immediate verbal repetition of the first sentence in each dual-sentence trial. Participants hear Sentence A followed by Sentence B; they immediately repeat Sentence A aloud. Performance is scored as the number of keywords correctly recalled per sentence. This measure assesses speech intelligibility under different noise-reduction processing conditions and signal-to-noise ratios.

    Measured: During a single study visit (approximately 1-2 hours), assessed immediately following presentation of each dual-sentence trial.

  2. Delayed Speech Recall (Cognitive Demand)

    Accuracy of delayed recall of the second sentence in each dual-sentence trial. Participants hear Sentence A followed by Sentence B, repeat the first sentence immediately, and then type the second sentence from memory. Performance is scored as the number of keywords correctly recalled per sentence. This measure reflects the combined effects of speech intelligibility, working-memory load, and cognitive demand under each noise-reduction processing condition and signal-to-noise ratio.

    Measured: During a single study visit (approximately 1-2 hours), assessed immediately following presentation of each dual-sentence trial.

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted17 Dec 2025
  2. Study start16 Oct 2025
  3. Primary completion30 Apr 2026 (estimated)
  4. Study completion30 Apr 2026 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Crossover
Model description
Participants complete all noise-reduction conditions in a fully counterbalanced crossover design. Each participant is exposed to every processing mode at each signal-to-noise ratio, with the order of conditions varied across participants to reduce learning effects and order bias.
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Participant, Investigator
Enrolment
50 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07287774
Sponsor's protocol ID
1406014978-2
Status last verified
Dec 2025
First submitted
3 Dec 2025
Last updated
17 Dec 2025
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
Individual data sharing
Yes: Individual trial data, including participant responses, by keyword

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Off, Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - Low and Hearing Aid Noise Reduction - High in people with Hearing Loss, Cochlear, run by Purdue University at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Dec 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Each site lists its own contact: choose the nearest one under Trial locations. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Immediate Speech Recall (time frame: During a single study visit (approximately 1-2 hours), assessed immediately following presentation of each dual-sentence trial.). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Dec 2025.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in