首页> 外文期刊>Trends in Hearing >Comparison of Frequency Transposition and Frequency Compression for People With Extensive Dead Regions in the Cochlea
【24h】

Comparison of Frequency Transposition and Frequency Compression for People With Extensive Dead Regions in the Cochlea

机译:耳蜗中有大量死区的人的频率移位和频率压缩的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

The objective was to determine the effects of two frequency-lowering algorithms (frequency transposition, FT, and frequency compression, FC) on audibility, speech identification, and subjective benefit, for people with high-frequency hearing loss and extensive dead regions (DRs) in the cochlea. A single-blind randomized crossover design was used. FT and FC were compared with each other and with a control condition (denoted ‘Control’) without frequency lowering, using hearing aids that were otherwise identical. Data were collected after at least 6 weeks of experience with a condition. Outcome measures were audibility, scores for consonant identification, scores for word-final /s, z/ detection (S test), sentence-in-noise intelligibility, and a questionnaire assessing self-perceived benefit (Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale). Ten adults with steeply sloping high-frequency hearing loss and extensive DRs were tested. FT and FC improved the audibility of some high-frequency sounds for 7 and 9 participants out of 10, respectively. At the group level, performance for FT and FC did not differ significantly from that for Control for any of the outcome measures. However, the pattern of consonant confusions varied across conditions. Bayesian analysis of the confusion matrices revealed a trend for FT to lead to more consistent error patterns than FC and Control. Thus, FT may have the potential to give greater benefit than Control or FC following extended experience or training.
机译:目的是为患有高频听力损失和广泛盲区(DR)的人群确定两种降频算法(频率转换,FT和频率压缩,FC)对可听性,语音识别和主观效益的影响在耳蜗。使用单盲随机交叉设计。使用其他相同的助听器,将FT和FC进行了比较,并在不降低频率的情况下将控制条件(称为“控制”)进行了比较。在经历至少6周的病情后收集数据。结果指标包括可听度,辅音识别分数,字/ s分数,z /检测分数(S检验),句子中的可懂度以及评估自我感知收益的问卷(空间和听力量表)。测试了十名成年人,他们的高频听力损失都非常陡峭,而且DR广泛。 FT和FC分别提高了10位中的7位和9位参与者的某些高频声音的可听性。在小组一级,对于任何结果指标,FT和FC的绩效与Control的绩效没有显着差异。但是,辅音混淆的模式因条件而异。贝叶斯对混淆矩阵的分析表明,与FC和Control相比,FT导致了更一致的错误模式。因此,在扩展的经验或培训之后,与对照组或功能库相比,金融服务区可能具有更大的收益。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号