A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Effects of audibility and multichannel wide dynamic range compression on consonant recognition for listeners with severe hearing loss. | LitMetric

Objective: This study examined the effects of multichannel wide-dynamic range compression (WDRC) amplification and stimulus audibility on consonant recognition and error patterns.

Design: Listeners had either severe or mild to moderate sensorineural hearing loss. Each listener was monaurally fit with a wearable hearing aid using typical clinical procedures, frequency-gain parameters, and a hybrid of clinically prescribed compression ratios for desired sensation level () and NAL-NL (). Consonant-vowel nonsense syllables were presented in soundfield at multiple input levels (50, 65, 80 dB SPL). Test conditions were four-channel fast-acting WDRC amplification and a control compression limiting (CL) amplification condition. Listeners identified the stimulus heard from choices presented on an on-screen display. A between-subject repeated measures design was used to evaluate consonant recognition and consonant confusion patterns.

Results: Fast-acting WDRC provided a considerable audibility advantage at 50 dB SPL, especially for listeners with severe hearing loss. Listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss received less audibility improvement from the fast-acting WDRC amplification, for conversational and high level speech, when compared with listeners with severe hearing loss. Analysis of WDRC benefit scores revealed that listeners had slightly lower scores with fast-acting WDRC amplification (relative to CL) when WDRC provided minimal improvement in audibility. The negative effect was greater for listeners with mild to moderate hearing loss compared with their counterparts with severe hearing loss.

Conclusions: All listeners, but particularly the severe loss group, benefited from fast-acting WDRC amplification for low-level speech. For conversational and higher speech levels (i.e., when WDRC does not confer a significant audibility advantage), fast-acting WDRC amplification seems to slightly degrade performance. Listeners' consonant confusion patterns suggest that this negative effect may be partly due to fast-acting WDRC-induced distortions, which alter specific consonant features. In support of this view, audibility accounted for a greater percentage of the variance in listeners' performance with CL amplification compared with fast-acting WDRC amplification.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2981704PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181aec5bcDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

wdrc amplification
28
fast-acting wdrc
28
hearing loss
24
listeners severe
20
severe hearing
16
consonant recognition
12
mild moderate
12
wdrc
11
listeners
9
amplification
9

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!