MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2035724514 · doi:10.1097/00003446-200210000-00002

Effects of Sensorineural Hearing Loss on Cortical Event-Related Potential and Behavioral Measures of Speech-Sound Processing

2002· article· en· W2035724514 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Peggy Oates, Diane Kurtzberg, David R. Stapells

Notice bibliographique

RevueEar and Hearing · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineNeuroscience
ThématiqueHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKorea Institute of Machinery and Materials
Mots-clésAudiologyMismatch negativitySensorineural hearing lossStimulus (psychology)Hearing lossPsychologyEvent-related potentialOddball paradigmActive listeningAuditory eventMedicineElectroencephalographyCognitionNeuroscienceCommunication

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In Brief Objective To investigate systematically the effects of sensorineural hearing loss on cortical event-related potentials (ERPs) N1, MMN, N2 and P3 and their associated behavioral measures (d′ sensitivity and reaction time) to the speech sounds /ba/ and /da/ presented at 65 and 80 dB ppe SPL. Design Cortical ERPs were recorded to /ba/ and /da/ speech stimuli presented at 65 and 80 dB ppe SPL from 20 normal-hearing adults and 20 adults who are hearing impaired. The degree of sensorineural impairments at 1000 to 2000 Hz ranged from mild losses (defined as 25 to 49 dB HL) to severe/profound losses (75 to 120 dB HL). The speech stimuli were presented in an oddball paradigm and the cortical ERPs were recorded in both active and passive listening conditions for each stimulus intensity. Results Both ERP amplitudes and behavioral discrimination (d′) scores were lower for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss than for those with normal hearing. However, these differences in response strength were evident only for those listeners whose average hearing loss at 1000 to 2000 Hz exceeded 60 dB HL for the lower intensity stimuli and exceeded 75 dB HL for the higher intensity stimuli. In contrast, prolongations in the ERP and behavioral latencies, relative to responses from normal-hearing subjects, began with even mild (25 to 49 dB HL) threshold elevations. The amplitude and latency response changes that occurred with sensorineural hearing loss were significantly greater for the later ERP peaks (N2/P3) and behavioral discrimination measures (d′ and RT) in comparison with earlier (N1, MMN) responses. Conclusions The results indicate that latency measures are more sensitive indicators of the early effects of decreased audibility than are response strength (amplitude, d′ or percent correct) measures. Sensorineural hearing loss has a greater impact on higher level or “nonsensory” cortical processing in comparison with lower level or “sensory” cortical processing. Possible physiologic mechanisms within the cortex that may be responsible for these response changes are presented. Lastly, the possible clinical significance of these ERP and behavioral findings is discussed. There is considerable interest in the use of cortical event-related potentials (ERPs), especially MMN, for assessing populations where behavioral measures of speech detection and discrimination are difficult to obtain (e.g., infants, young children, and difficult-to-test patients). These potentials have shown promising, though preliminary, results in assessing benefit from sensory aids and monitoring of an individual's progress with auditory training. This study aimed to investigate systematically the effects of sensorineural hearing loss on cortical event-related potentials and their associated behavioral measures (d sensitivity and reaction-time) to the speech sounds /ba/ and /da/. Both ERP amplitudes and behavioral discrimination (d) scores were lower for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss than for those with normal hearing, but this effect was evident only for listeners with more pronounced hearing impairment. In contrast, prolongations in the ERP and behavioral latencies, relative to responses from normal-hearing subjects, began with even mild threshold elevations. The results indicate that latency measures are more sensitive indicators of the early effects of decreased audibility than are response strength (amplitude, d, or percent correct) measures.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,005

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,060
Tête enseignante GPT0,309
Écart entre enseignants0,249 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations170
Publié2002
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEar and HearingMême sujetHearing Loss and RehabilitationTravaux en français237 207