Data-Driven Prediction of Speech-in-Noise Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Machine Learning Models.

Authors

Prabhani Athukorala, Anu Nair, Srikanta K Mishra

Published in

Annals of biomedical engineering. Oct 11, 2026. Epub Oct 11, 2026.

Abstract

Difficulty understanding speech in noise (SIN) is a major determinant of communication ability and quality of life, affecting individuals with hearing loss as well as some with normal hearing. Data-driven prediction methods offer a promising approach for modeling complex, multidimensional factors underlying speech perception. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated computational approaches for predicting SIN-related outcomes, compared predictive performance across model classes where quantitative synthesis was feasible, and identified methodological factors relevant to model selection, generalizability, and clinical translation.
Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using machine learning (ML), neural networks, automatic speech recognition (ASR), or auditory model-based approaches to predict, simulate, or evaluate SIN-related outcomes. Quantitative synthesis was performed using random-effects models for studies reporting support vector machine (SVM) or random forest (RF) performance, and between-study heterogeneity was assessed.
Eligible studies included traditional ML, neural network, ASR-based, and mechanistic auditory modeling approaches. SVM accuracy pooled at 0.71 and SVM area under the curve at 0.84, while RF accuracy pooled at 0.86 and RF recall at 0.81. Bootstrap estimates were broadly consistent with the primary random-effects estimates, although between-study heterogeneity ranged from moderate to very high across analyses.
Data-driven prediction approaches show promise for predicting SIN-related outcomes, but high heterogeneity precludes identifying a single optimal model. Model selection should reflect the prediction target, data type, sample size, interpretability, and intended use. Current evidence supports proof-of-concept performance more strongly than clinical utility, highlighting the need for larger, standardized, externally validated studies.

PMID:
42859950
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 11 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.