MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1698227950 · doi:10.1080/14992020500258628

Comparison of multiple auditory steady-state responses (80 versus 40 Hz) and slow cortical potentials for threshold estimation in hearing-impaired adults

2005· article· en· W1698227950 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Van Maanen, David R. Stapells

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Audiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAudiogramAudiologyEvoked potentialTone burstSteady state (chemistry)Hearing lossMedicinePsychologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluated the use of multiple auditory steady-state responses (ASSRs) and slow cortical potentials (SCPs) to estimate behavioural audiograms in adults for compensation cases. Two groups of 23 subjects were assessed using either 80 Hz or 40 Hz multiple simultaneous tones with carrier frequencies of 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 kHz. SCP thresholds for 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 kHz were obtained for both groups. Mean evoked potential thresholds (dB HL) minus behavioural pure-tone thresholds (dB HL) difference scores were 5–17 dB for the 80 Hz group, 1–14 dB for the 40 Hz group, and 20–22 dB for the SCPs. Thresholds for 40 Hz ASSR were significantly closer to behavioural thresholds than were 80 Hz or SCP thresholds. SCP and 40 Hz ASSR audiogram estimates were obtained more quickly than the 80 Hz ASSR. Multiple 40 Hz ASSR is the method of choice for evoked potential threshold estimation in adults.SumarioEste estudio evaluó el uso de las respuestas auditivas múltiples de estado estable (ASSR) y de los potenciales corticales lentos (SCP) para estimar en casos de compensación, los audiogramas comportamentales de adultos. Se realizaron pruebas en dos grupos de 23 sujetos utilizando tonos múltiples simultáneos a 80 ó 40 Hz con frecuencias portadoras de 500, 1000, 2000 y 4000 Hz. Se obtuvieron umbrales SCP para 500, 1000 y 2000 Hz en ambos grupos. Los umbrales promedio de potenciales evocados (dBHL) menos las respuestas tonales comportamentales se ubicaron entre 5 y 17dB para el grupo de 80 Hz, de 1 a 40 dB para el grupo de 40 Hz y de 20 a 22 dB para los SCP. Los umbrales de las ASSR de 40 Hz estuvieron significativamente mas cercanos a los umbrales comportamentales que los de 80 Hz o los umbrales SCP. Los SCP y las ASSR-40 Hz se obtuvieron más rápido que las ASSR-80 Hz. Las ASSR múltiples de 40 Hz son el método de elección para la estimación de umbrales con potenciales evocados en adultos.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations81
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of AudiologySame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207