What changed for Hearing Loss
A plain English summary of what recently moved in the public data Voxsanity tracks for Hearing Loss. Updated from government registries. Not medical advice.
How to read these changes: every figure on this page is the difference between two snapshots of what Voxsanity had tracked on each date. Voxsanity only began taking daily snapshots in July 2026 and is still ingesting the public registries, so a rise here is mostly our own coverage expanding rather than new research appearing. Read it as our tracked coverage growing, not as a claim about real-world research changing this fast: it overstates how much actually changed.
Comparing the two most recent snapshots, 27 July 2026 and 28 July 2026.
- Trials recruiting worldwide 243 to 242 (-1)
- Trials on record 1,603 to 1,606 (+3)
Newly subsidised on the PBS
No PBS-reviewed medicines are tracked for Hearing Loss yet, so new PBS listings cannot be reported for it. This is a gap in what Voxsanity has mapped, not a statement that no medicines are subsidised — check the PBS directly.
Past updates
Tracking began in July 2026. Month on month changes will appear here once a second month of data has been recorded. Until then, the comparison above shows the most recent movement.
Recent trend
Weekly, most recent weeks (fills out to a monthly trend as history grows).
Recent trial results
The 30 most recent of 78 trials tracked for Hearing Loss that have reported results to a public registry.
AI generated results summary. Written by an AI model from the official source data and checked on a sample basis. It can contain mistakes, so confirm anything important against the original source. How we use AI
-
NCT02819856 · results posted 25 June 2026
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT02819856) enrolled 35 people in total across four groups. Eight people received a placebo capsule (containing no active ingredient), while the remaining 27 received different doses of a capsule called SPI-1005, which contains a compound called ebselen — with groups taking one, two, or three 200mg capsules respectively. Most participants completed the trial, with a small number (four in total across all groups) not finishing. The trial was measuring changes in hearing and balance that can sometimes occur as a side effect of...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT05709223 · results posted 15 May 2026
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial involved 17 people who had received a cochlear implant. Nine participants started in one order of hearing programmes and eight started in the other, with 13 people completing the trial overall. The trial was comparing two different ways of setting up ("fitting") a cochlear implant's sound programme: one based on behavioural testing (how a person responds to sounds in a clinic) and another based on a method called categorical loudness scaling (where a person rates how loud sounds seem to them). The study measured how well parti...
-
NCT03336398 · results posted 25 March 2026
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 42 people who had tinnitus (ringing or noise in the ears). The study was measuring levels of two brain chemicals — GABA and Glutamate (also called Glx) — in the part of the brain involved in hearing (the auditory cortex). These chemicals were measured using a specialised brain scanning technique called Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS), which can detect chemical signals in the brain without surgery. Participants received both a ketamine infusion (a drug being investigated) and a saline (salt water) infusion on sep...
-
NCT04610112 · results posted 25 March 2026
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04610112) enrolled 30 participants, all of whom completed the study — none dropped out. The trial was measuring hearing performance using two standard hearing tests: one that checks how well people can correctly identify single spoken words in a quiet environment, and another that measures how well people can follow speech when there is background noise. The reported data shows that on the quiet word-recognition test (called the Freiburger Monosyllables Score), participants scored an average of 54.58 out of a possible 100...
-
NCT06298396 · results posted 17 December 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 20 participants, all of whom used a cochlear implant sound processor. The trial tested different sound processor settings, called MAPs — a standard "Default" setting and three lower-power settings labelled LP1, LP2, and LP3. The study measured how well participants could understand speech in quiet conditions and in noisy conditions when using each of these different settings. Participants went through multiple rounds of testing, and all but one participant completed the full programme of testing across the different s...
-
NCT06173687 · results posted 3 December 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT06173687) enrolled 51 participants, with 45 completing the study and 6 not completing it. The trial was measuring the stability of electrical readings from a cochlear implant — specifically, how consistent the electrical signals were across the implant's electrode contacts (the small components that deliver sound signals) over an 8-week period. The reported data shows that the primary outcome measured something called "impedance" — this is essentially the resistance to electrical signals across the implant's 22 electrode...
Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
-
NCT04972162 · results posted 30 September 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial involved 28 people in total, split into two groups of 14. It used a "crossover" design, meaning every participant tried both approaches — hearing aids fitted using a web app, and hearing aids fitted using the standard clinical method — with a short break in between. Two participants (one from each group) did not complete the washout period between the two stages, so 26 people finished the full trial. The trial was measuring how much benefit people got from each type of hearing aid fitting, using a questionnaire called the APHA...
-
NCT04908631 · results posted 22 August 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial looked at a treatment approach combining a form of gentle brain stimulation — called transcranial direct current stimulation, or tDCS, which involves applying a very low electrical current to the scalp — with auditory (hearing) training. The trial was designed to test whether this combined program was practical and manageable for participants, rather than to test whether it produced any particular health outcome. Eight people were enrolled in the single study group, five completed the study, and three did not finish. The repo...
-
NCT05893992 · results posted 17 August 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial involved 26 adults with hearing loss, split into two groups of 13. It used a "crossover" design, meaning both groups tried both conditions — listening with a digital noise management feature turned on, and listening in quiet — just in a different order. All 26 participants completed the trial. The study was measuring brain activity in the front part of the brain (using a light-based scanning method called fNIRS, which tracks blood oxygen levels as a rough guide to mental effort and motivation), as well as how accurately people...
-
NCT05619575 · results posted 31 July 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 20 adults who use a cochlear implant, with 17 completing the study and 3 not completing it. The trial was comparing two versions of the Cochlear CP1170 sound processor — one with a feature called "ForwardFocus" turned on (which is designed to focus on sound coming from in front of the wearer) and one with it turned off — as well as comparing the CP1170 to participants' own existing processors. The main thing being measured was how well participants could understand speech in noisy situations, using a standardised Aust...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT05379231 · results posted 11 June 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 20 participants, all in a single group. The trial was testing different hearing aid set-ups for people with significant hearing loss in one ear. Specifically, it compared two types of device configurations — a BiCROS fitting (which picks up sound from the poorer ear and sends it to the better ear) and a monaural fitting (a hearing aid on the better ear only) — each tested with two different microphone settings (a directional "beamformer" mode and an "omni" mode that picks up sound from all directions). Participants al...
-
NCT04242940 · results posted 15 May 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04242940) involved 14 participants, all of whom completed the study — none dropped out. The trial was testing the Ponto 4 sound processor, a bone-anchored hearing device, and looked at how a feature called OSN (Oticon Speech Navigator, a noise-management setting) affected listeners when it was turned on compared to when it was turned off. The researchers measured several things: how much participants' pupils dilated during listening tasks (pupil dilation is used as an indirect measure of mental effort — bigger dilation is...
-
NCT05258773 · results posted 23 April 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT05258773) enrolled 28 people in total — 18 in the treatment arm (who received a medicine called SENS-401) and 10 in the control arm (who did not). The trial was looking at people undergoing cochlear implant surgery, and it was primarily measuring whether SENS-401 could be detected in the fluid of the inner ear (called perilymph) after seven days of taking the medicine. It also measured drug levels in the blood, and tracked any changes in participants' hearing thresholds (the softest sounds a person can detect) over time....
-
NCT04750642 · results posted 22 April 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04750642) enrolled 29 people in total — 14 in the group receiving the investigational cochlear implant device (called CI632D) and 15 in the group receiving a comparator cochlear implant device. Of those, 13 people in each group completed the study. The trial was primarily measuring electrical resistance (called impedance) inside the implant at six months after surgery — lower resistance is thought to indicate less scar tissue build-up around the implant's electrodes — as well as how participants' ability to understand spee...
-
NCT05337748 · results posted 20 March 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial involved 68 people in total — 35 in one group and 33 in another. The study compared two different ways of fitting hearing aids from a brand called Lexie: one group fitted the hearing aids themselves at home (the "Self Test and Fit" group), while the other group had them fitted by a hearing health professional (the "Professional Test and Fit" group). The trial measured things like how much difficulty people had hearing in everyday situations, how satisfied they were with their hearing aids, and how well they could hear speech i...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT04618315 · results posted 6 March 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 584 adults across three groups, each receiving a different approach to being fitted with hearing aids: one based on standard audiology best practice, one where the consumer made their own choices about the fitting, and one described as an efficient fitting process. The main thing being measured was self-reported hearing aid benefit at six weeks, using a questionnaire called the Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit — a 66-question survey where participants rated their hearing difficulties before and after using hearing aids,...
-
NCT04831281 · results posted 4 March 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04831281) enrolled 28 people across three groups: 9 received a placebo (a dummy treatment with no active ingredient), 9 received a 40 mg dose of ATH-1017, and 10 received a 70 mg dose of ATH-1017. ATH-1017 is an investigational drug being studied in relation to Alzheimer's disease. The trial was measuring two things: a standard cognitive test called the ADAS-Cog13 (where higher scores mean greater thinking difficulties, on a scale of 0 to 85), and a brain-activity measure called ERP P300 latency (which tracks how quickly t...
-
NCT05476328 · results posted 13 February 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 8 participants, all of whom completed the study — none dropped out. The trial was looking at how well people could hear and repeat single-syllable words in a quiet environment. Specifically, it was comparing three different sound-coding strategies (ways that a hearing device processes sound): a standard approach called ACE, and two newer approaches called SPACE and OPAL-SPACE. The reported data shows that participants were scored on the percentage of single-syllable words they could correctly repeat back. For the ACE...
Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
-
NCT05962814 · results posted 6 February 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 11 infants, with 10 completing the study and 1 not completing it. The trial was testing a device called EarGenie MVP, which uses a brain-scanning technique called fNIRS (functional near-infrared spectroscopy — a way of measuring brain activity through the scalp using light) to check whether sleeping babies can detect and tell apart different sounds. The researchers wanted to see whether the device could produce measurable, meaningful results in a real-world setting, comparing its output to results previously gathered...
-
NCT03878875 · results posted 12 December 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 32 adults in total — 16 in a "High Noise Exposure" group and 16 in a "Low Noise Exposure" group. All 32 participants completed the study. The trial was measuring several aspects of hearing across two testing sessions (a planned third session was not completed). The measures included high-frequency hearing thresholds (how quietly a person can detect high-pitched sounds), inner ear responses called otoacoustic emissions (a way of testing how well tiny hair cells inside the ear are working), a reflex response in the midd...
-
NCT05076045 · results posted 5 December 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 32 people in total, split into two groups of 16. It used a "crossover" design, meaning each participant tried both conditions — wearing Personal Sound Amplification Products (PSAPs, which are consumer hearing amplification devices) and wearing no device — with a one-week rest period in between. By the end of the trial, 28 participants completed both sessions. The trial was measuring how people performed on listening tasks in noisy environments, as well as tracking brain activity (using a technique called EEG, which re...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT05270876 · results posted 5 December 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 20 participants, and all 20 completed the study — none dropped out. The trial was looking at two different methods of fitting (adjusting and setting up) cochlear implants or hearing devices, comparing a standard fitting method against a newer, novel fitting method. The main thing being measured was how well participants could correctly identify single-syllable words in a quiet environment under each method. The reported data shows that there was a difference of 3.8 percentage points in the scores between the two fitt...
Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
-
NCT05286385 · results posted 5 August 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial involved 10 participants, all of whom completed the study. The trial was comparing different versions of cochlear implant sound processors — specifically the CP1150 sound processor, the CP1150 with modified firmware (updated internal software), the CP1150 with a feature called "Forward Focus" (a directional microphone setting), and an older model called the CP1110. The main thing being measured was how well participants could correctly hear and repeat words in a quiet environment, using a standard word recognition test. The r...
-
NCT05158296 · results posted 12 July 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT05158296) enrolled a total of seven participants across three groups: two people received a lower dose of a medicine called ultevursen (60/60 micrograms), three people received a higher dose of ultevursen (180/60 micrograms), and two people received a sham procedure (a dummy treatment used for comparison). The trial was set up to measure changes in vision over time, looking at things like how clearly participants could read a standard eye chart, how well they could see in low light, and changes in a specific layer of the e...
-
NCT04754477 · results posted 10 June 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 20 people who had received an active osseointegrated steady-state implant system — a type of surgically implanted hearing device anchored to the bone. Nineteen of the 20 participants completed the study, and one did not. The trial was tracking a range of things over the period following surgery, including any unwanted health events (called adverse events), any problems with the device itself (called device deficiencies), medications participants were taking at the same time, background information about participants'...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT03859648 · results posted 30 May 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial looked at a bone-anchored hearing device called the BONEBRIDGE. Eight people started the study, six completed it, and two did not finish. The trial was measuring things like changes in hearing test scores, sound sensitivity with the device switched on, and whether any unwanted events related to the device occurred — all compared between the starting point (before the device was activated) and three months after activation. The reported data shows that one out of the eight participants experienced an adverse event (an unwanted...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT05265260 · results posted 5 April 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 32 adults who were already using a Nucleus cochlear implant (a device surgically placed to help people with severe hearing loss). All 32 participants completed the study, with no one dropping out. The trial was measuring how well participants could recognise spoken sentences in a quiet environment, using a French-language test called the MBAA2. Based on their scores, participants were placed into one of two groups: "good performers" (those who correctly identified 90 or more sentences out of 100) and "poor performers"...
-
NCT05374421 · results posted 12 March 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT05374421) looked at whether the Erchonia® THL™ laser device had any effect on tinnitus — a condition where people experience ringing or other noises in their ears — compared to a placebo (inactive/fake) laser. A total of 15 people started the trial: 8 were assigned to the active laser group and 7 to the placebo laser group. Of those, only 8 people finished the trial (5 in the active group and 3 in the placebo group), meaning a notable number of participants — 3 from the active group and 4 from the placebo group — did not c...
-
NCT04987021 · results posted 21 February 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 15 participants, all of whom completed the study with none dropping out. The trial involved a single group of participants who used a smartphone app called the Nucleus Smart App, which included a feature called "Remote Assist Custom Sound Pro 6.3." The study was measuring how easy the app was to use — specifically, whether participants could complete certain key tasks on their first try without any help. The reported data shows that the trial used a usability rating scale running from 1 to 5, where a score of 1 meant...
-
NCT03533686 · results posted 8 August 2023
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 66 participants across six groups. The groups included adults with hearing loss on one side only (single-sided deafness), adults with a type of hearing loss caused by sound not passing through the ear properly (conductive hearing loss), and children with either one-sided or two-sided conductive hearing loss. The trial was comparing two types of bone-conduction hearing devices: a surgically implanted device (called BAHA, which attaches to a small titanium fitting in the skull) and a non-surgical stick-on device called...
See all 78 reported results for Hearing Loss
These are the results as reported to the registry, not medical advice. Verify independently with the trial site and discuss what they mean for you with your doctor.
What is coming
AI generated pipeline summary. Written by an AI model from the official source data and checked on a sample basis. It can contain mistakes, so confirm anything important against the original source. How we use AI
According to NIH funding data, hearing loss receives a very large amount of public research funding from the United States government, and that level of investment has remained broadly steady from year to year. For patients, this suggests that hearing loss is an established and ongoing priority within the global research community. A stable funding base generally means that scientific work across...
See the full Hearing Loss page
Not medical advice. Voxsanity republishes public government health data in plain English. These figures describe research and registry activity, not the suitability of any treatment for any person. Trial status can change; always verify current status directly with the trial site and confirm Australian availability with your doctor.