Evaluation of Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses as an Objective Aided Outcome Measure
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: The present study evaluated a novel test paradigm based on speech-evoked envelope following responses (EFRs) as an objective aided outcome measure for individuals fitted with hearing aids. Although intended for use in infants with hearing loss, this study evaluated the paradigm in adults with hearing loss, as a precursor to further evaluation in infants. The test stimulus was a naturally male-spoken token /susa∫i/, modified to enable recording of eight individual EFRs, two from each vowel for different formants and one from each fricative. In experiment I, sensitivity of the paradigm to changes in audibility due to varying stimulus level and use of hearing aids was tested. In experiment II, sensitivity of the paradigm to changes in aided audible bandwidth was evaluated. As well, experiment II aimed to test convergent validity of the EFR paradigm by comparing the effect of bandwidth on EFRs and behavioral outcome measures of hearing aid fitting. DESIGN: Twenty-one adult hearing aid users with mild to moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss participated in the study. To evaluate the effects of level and amplification in experiment I, the stimulus was presented at 50 and 65 dB SPL through an ER-2 insert earphone in unaided conditions and through individually verified hearing aids in aided conditions. Behavioral thresholds of EFR carriers were obtained using an ER-2 insert earphone to estimate sensation level of EFR carriers. To evaluate the effect of aided audible bandwidth in experiment II, EFRs were elicited by /susa∫i/ low-pass filtered at 1, 2, and 4 kHz and presented through the programmed hearing aid. EFRs recorded in the 65 dB SPL aided condition in experiment I represented the full bandwidth condition. EEG was recorded from the vertex to the nape of the neck over 300 sweeps. Speech discrimination using the University of Western Ontario Distinctive Feature Differences test and sound quality rating using the Multiple-Stimulus Hidden Reference and Anchor paradigm were measured in the same bandwidth conditions. RESULTS: In experiment I, an increase in stimulus level above threshold and the use of amplification resulted in a significant increase in the number of EFRs detected per condition. At positive sensation levels, an increase in level demonstrated a significant increase in response amplitude in unaided and aided conditions. At 50 and 65 dB SPL, the use of amplification led to a significant increase in response amplitude for the majority of carriers. In experiment II, the number of EFR detections and the combined response amplitude of all eight EFRs improved with an increase in bandwidth up to 4 kHz. In contrast, behavioral measures continued to improve at wider bandwidths. Further change in EFR parameters was possibly limited by the hearing aid bandwidth. Significant positive correlations were found between EFR parameters and behavioral test scores in experiment II. CONCLUSIONS: The EFR paradigm demonstrates sensitivity to changes in audibility due to a change in stimulus level, bandwidth, and use of amplification in clinically feasible test times. The paradigm may thus have potential applications as an objective aided outcome measure. Further investigations exploring stimulus-response relationships in aided conditions and validation studies in children are warranted.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».