scholarly journals On prediction of aided behavioural measures using speech auditory brainstem responses and decision trees

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e0260090
Author(s):  
Emanuele Perugia ◽  
Ghada BinKhamis ◽  
Josef Schlittenlacher ◽  
Karolina Kluk
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Digit Span ◽  
Regression Trees ◽  
Auditory Brainstem ◽  
Auditory Brainstem Responses ◽  
Speech Stimuli ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Pure Tone Average ◽  
Clinical Strategies

Current clinical strategies to assess benefits from hearing aids (HAs) are based on self-reported questionnaires and speech-in-noise (SIN) tests; which require behavioural cooperation. Instead, objective measures based on Auditory Brainstem Responses (ABRs) to speech stimuli would not require the individuals’ cooperation. Here, we re-analysed an existing dataset to predict behavioural measures with speech-ABRs using regression trees. Ninety-two HA users completed a self-reported questionnaire (SSQ-Speech) and performed two aided SIN tests: sentences in noise (BKB-SIN) and vowel-consonant-vowels (VCV) in noise. Speech-ABRs were evoked by a 40 ms [da] and recorded in 2x2 conditions: aided vs. unaided and quiet vs. background noise. For each recording condition, two sets of features were extracted: 1) amplitudes and latencies of speech-ABR peaks, 2) amplitudes and latencies of speech-ABR F0 encoding. Two regression trees were fitted for each of the three behavioural measures with either feature set and age, digit-span forward and backward, and pure tone average (PTA) as possible predictors. The PTA was the only predictor in the SSQ-Speech trees. In the BKB-SIN trees, performance was predicted by the aided latency of peak F in quiet for participants with PTAs between 43 and 61 dB HL. In the VCV trees, performance was predicted by the aided F0 encoding latency and the aided amplitude of peak VA in quiet for participants with PTAs ≤ 47 dB HL. These findings indicate that PTA was more informative than any speech-ABR measure, as these were relevant only for a subset of the participants. Therefore, speech-ABRs evoked by a 40 ms [da] are not a clinical predictor of behavioural measures in HA users.

scholarly journals Speech Auditory Brainstem Responses in Adult Hearing Aid Users: Effects of Aiding and Background Noise, and Prediction of Behavioral Measures

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 233121651984829 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ghada BinKhamis ◽  
Antonio Elia Forte ◽  
Tobias Reichenbach ◽  
Martin O’Driscoll ◽  
Karolina Kluk
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Objective Measure ◽  
Auditory Brainstem ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Auditory Brainstem Responses ◽  
Speech Understanding ◽  
Reported Speech ◽  
Speech Detection ◽  
Speech In Noise

Evaluation of patients who are unable to provide behavioral responses on standard clinical measures is challenging due to the lack of standard objective (non-behavioral) clinical audiological measures that assess the outcome of an intervention (e.g., hearing aids). Brainstem responses to short consonant-vowel stimuli (speech-auditory brainstem responses [speech-ABRs]) have been proposed as a measure of subcortical encoding of speech, speech detection, and speech-in-noise performance in individuals with normal hearing. Here, we investigated the potential application of speech-ABRs as an objective clinical outcome measure of speech detection, speech-in-noise detection and recognition, and self-reported speech understanding in 98 adults with sensorineural hearing loss. We compared aided and unaided speech-ABRs, and speech-ABRs in quiet and in noise. In addition, we evaluated whether speech-ABR F0 encoding (obtained from the complex cross-correlation with the 40 ms [da] fundamental waveform) predicted aided behavioral speech recognition in noise or aided self-reported speech understanding. Results showed that (a) aided speech-ABRs had earlier peak latencies, larger peak amplitudes, and larger F0 encoding amplitudes compared to unaided speech-ABRs; (b) the addition of background noise resulted in later F0 encoding latencies but did not have an effect on peak latencies and amplitudes or on F0 encoding amplitudes; and (c) speech-ABRs were not a significant predictor of any of the behavioral or self-report measures. These results show that speech-ABR F0 encoding is not a good predictor of speech-in-noise recognition or self-reported speech understanding with hearing aids. However, our results suggest that speech-ABRs may have potential for clinical application as an objective measure of speech detection with hearing aids.

scholarly journals Perception of Speech in Noise: Neural Correlates

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
pp. 2268-2279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judy H. Song ◽  
Erika Skoe ◽  
Karen Banai ◽  
Nina Kraus
Keyword(s):  
Fundamental Frequency ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Auditory Brainstem ◽  
Auditory Brainstem Responses ◽  
Auditory Information ◽  
Neural Encoding ◽  
Language Experience ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Perceptual Abilities

The presence of irrelevant auditory information (other talkers, environmental noises) presents a major challenge to listening to speech. The fundamental frequency (F0) of the target speaker is thought to provide an important cue for the extraction of the speaker's voice from background noise, but little is known about the relationship between speech-in-noise (SIN) perceptual ability and neural encoding of the F0. Motivated by recent findings that music and language experience enhance brainstem representation of sound, we examined the hypothesis that brainstem encoding of the F0 is diminished to a greater degree by background noise in people with poorer perceptual abilities in noise. To this end, we measured speech-evoked auditory brainstem responses to /da/ in quiet and two multitalker babble conditions (two-talker and six-talker) in native English-speaking young adults who ranged in their ability to perceive and recall SIN. Listeners who were poorer performers on a standardized SIN measure demonstrated greater susceptibility to the degradative effects of noise on the neural encoding of the F0. Particularly diminished was their phase-locked activity to the fundamental frequency in the portion of the syllable known to be most vulnerable to perceptual disruption (i.e., the formant transition period). Our findings suggest that the subcortical representation of the F0 in noise contributes to the perception of speech in noisy conditions.

scholarly journals Individual differences in the attentional modulation of the human auditory brainstem response to speech inform on speech-in-noise deficits

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Saiz-Alía ◽  
Antonio Elia Forte ◽  
Tobias Reichenbach
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Brainstem Response ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Auditory Brainstem ◽  
Normal Hearing ◽  
Auditory Brainstem Responses ◽  
Sensitivity Threshold ◽  
Attentional Modulation ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Hearing Thresholds ◽  
Brainstem Response

Abstract People with normal hearing thresholds can nonetheless have difficulty with understanding speech in noisy backgrounds. The origins of such supra-threshold hearing deficits remain largely unclear. Previously we showed that the auditory brainstem response to running speech is modulated by selective attention, evidencing a subcortical mechanism that contributes to speech-in-noise comprehension. We observed, however, significant variation in the magnitude of the brainstem’s attentional modulation between the different volunteers. Here we show that this variability relates to the ability of the subjects to understand speech in background noise. In particular, we assessed 43 young human volunteers with normal hearing thresholds for their speech-in-noise comprehension. We also recorded their auditory brainstem responses to running speech when selectively attending to one of two competing voices. To control for potential peripheral hearing deficits, and in particular for cochlear synaptopathy, we further assessed noise exposure, the temporal sensitivity threshold, the middle-ear muscle reflex, and the auditory-brainstem response to clicks in various levels of background noise. These tests did not show evidence for cochlear synaptopathy amongst the volunteers. Furthermore, we found that only the attentional modulation of the brainstem response to speech was significantly related to speech-in-noise comprehension. Our results therefore evidence an impact of top-down modulation of brainstem activity on the variability in speech-in-noise comprehension amongst the subjects.

scholarly journals Auditory Brainstem Responses to Successive Sounds: Effects of Gap Duration and Depth

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-46
Author(s):  
Fan-Yin Cheng ◽  
Craig A. Champlin
Keyword(s):  
Background Noise ◽  
Tone Burst ◽  
Auditory Brainstem ◽  
Auditory Brainstem Responses ◽  
Physical Parameters ◽  
Temporal Acuity ◽  
Harmonic Complex ◽  
Rapid Changes ◽  
Brainstem Response ◽  
Physiological Correlate

Temporal acuity is the ability to differentiate between sounds based on fluctuations in the waveform envelope. The proximity of successive sounds and background noise diminishes the ability to track rapid changes between consecutive sounds. We determined whether a physiological correlate of temporal acuity is also affected by these factors. We recorded the auditory brainstem response (ABR) from human listeners using a harmonic complex (S1) followed by a brief tone burst (S2) with the latter serving as the evoking signal. The duration and depth of the silent gap between S1 and S2 were manipulated, and the peak latency and amplitude of wave V were measured. The latency of the responses decreased significantly as the duration or depth of the gap increased. The amplitude of the responses was not affected by the duration or depth of the gap. These findings suggest that changing the physical parameters of the gap affects the auditory system’s ability to encode successive sounds.

Evaluation of a Transient Noise Reduction Strategy for Hearing Aids

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 (08) ◽  
pp. 606-615 ◽  
Author(s):  
HaiHong Liu ◽  
Hua Zhang ◽  
Ruth A. Bentler ◽  
Demin Han ◽  
Luo Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Hearing Aid ◽  
Sound Quality ◽  
T Test ◽  
Reduction Strategy ◽  
Speech Stimuli ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Speech Clarity

Background: Transient noise can be disruptive for people wearing hearing aids. Ideally, the transient noise should be detected and controlled by the signal processor without disrupting speech and other intended input signals. A technology for detecting and controlling transient noises in hearing aids was evaluated in this study. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a transient noise reduction strategy on various transient noises and to determine whether the strategy has a negative impact on sound quality of intended speech inputs. Research Design: This was a quasi-experimental study. The study involved 24 hearing aid users. Each participant was asked to rate the parameters of speech clarity, transient noise loudness, and overall impression for speech stimuli under the algorithm-on and algorithm-off conditions. During the evaluation, three types of stimuli were used: transient noises, speech, and background noises. The transient noises included “knife on a ceramic board,” “mug on a tabletop,” “office door slamming,” “car door slamming,” and “pen tapping on countertop.” The speech sentences used for the test were presented by a male speaker in Mandarin. The background noises included “party noise” and “traffic noise.” All of these sounds were combined into five listening situations: (1) speech only, (2) transient noise only, (3) speech and transient noise, (4) background noise and transient noise, and (5) speech and background noise and transient noise. Results: There was no significant difference on the ratings of speech clarity between the algorithm-on and algorithm-off (t-test, p = 0.103). Further analysis revealed that speech clarity was significant better at 70 dB SLP than 55 dB SPL (p < 0.001). For transient noise loudness: under the algorithm-off condition, the percentages of subjects rating the transient noise to be somewhat soft, appropriate, somewhat loud, and too loud were 0.2, 47.1, 29.6, and 23.1%, respectively. The corresponding percentages under the algorithm-on were 3.0, 72.6, 22.9, and 1.4%, respectively. A significant difference on the ratings of the transient noise loudness was found between the algorithm-on and algorithm-off (t-test, p < 0.001). For overall impression for speech stimuli: under the algorithm-off condition, the percentage of subjects rating the algorithm to be not helpful at all, somewhat helpful, helpful, and very helpful for speech stimuli were 36.5, 20.8, 33.9, and 8.9%, respectively. Under the algorithm-on condition, the corresponding percentages were 35.0, 19.3, 30.7, and 15.0%, respectively. Statistical analysis revealed there was a significant difference on the ratings of overall impression on speech stimuli. The ratings under the algorithm-on condition were significantly more helpful for speech understanding than the ratings under algorithm-off (t-test, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The transient noise reduction strategy appropriately controlled the loudness for most of the transient noises and did not affect the sound quality, which could be beneficial to hearing aid wearers.

Differences in Responses from the Cochleae and Central Nervous Systems of Females with Low versus High Acceptable Noise Levels

2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (09) ◽  
pp. 667-676 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley W. Harkrider ◽  
Joanna W. Tampas
Keyword(s):  
Auditory System ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Auditory Brainstem ◽  
Auditory Brainstem Responses ◽  
Intersubject Variability ◽  
Hearing Sensitivity ◽  
Central Regions ◽  
Central Nervous Systems ◽  
Medial Olivocochlear

Studies of acceptable noise level (ANL) consistently report large intersubject variability in acceptance of background noise while listening to speech. This variability is not related to age, gender, hearing sensitivity, type of background noise, speech perception in noise performance, or efferent activity of the medial olivocochlear pathway. An exploratory study was conducted to determine if differences in aggregate responses from the peripheral and central auditory system can account for intersubject variability in ANL. Click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (CEOAEs), binaural auditory brainstem responses (ABRs), and middle latency responses (MLRs) were measured in females with normal hearing with low (n = 6) versus high (n = 7) ANLs. Results of this preliminary study indicate no differences between the groups for CEOAEs or waves I or III of the ABR. Differences between the two groups emerge for the amplitudes of wave V of the ABR and for the Na-Pa component of the MLR, suggesting that physiological variations arising from more central regions of the auditory system may mediate background noise acceptance.

scholarly journals Neural Measures of Pitch Processing in EEG Responses to Running Speech

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florine L. Bachmann ◽  
Ewen N. MacDonald ◽  
Jens Hjortkjær
Keyword(s):  
Speech Signal ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Auditory Brainstem ◽  
Auditory Brainstem Responses ◽  
Speech Stimuli ◽  
Relative Pitch ◽  
Cortical Responses ◽  
Brainstem Response ◽  
Signal Yield ◽  
Model Predictor

Linearized encoding models are increasingly employed to model cortical responses to running speech. Recent extensions to subcortical responses suggest clinical perspectives, potentially complementing auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) or frequency-following responses (FFRs) that are current clinical standards. However, while it is well-known that the auditory brainstem responds both to transient amplitude variations and the stimulus periodicity that gives rise to pitch, these features co-vary in running speech. Here, we discuss challenges in disentangling the features that drive the subcortical response to running speech. Cortical and subcortical electroencephalographic (EEG) responses to running speech from 19 normal-hearing listeners (12 female) were analyzed. Using forward regression models, we confirm that responses to the rectified broadband speech signal yield temporal response functions consistent with wave V of the ABR, as shown in previous work. Peak latency and amplitude of the speech-evoked brainstem response were correlated with standard click-evoked ABRs recorded at the vertex electrode (Cz). Similar responses could be obtained using the fundamental frequency (F0) of the speech signal as model predictor. However, simulations indicated that dissociating responses to temporal fine structure at the F0 from broadband amplitude variations is not possible given the high co-variance of the features and the poor signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of subcortical EEG responses. In cortex, both simulations and data replicated previous findings indicating that envelope tracking on frontal electrodes can be dissociated from responses to slow variations in F0 (relative pitch). Yet, no association between subcortical F0-tracking and cortical responses to relative pitch could be detected. These results indicate that while subcortical speech responses are comparable to click-evoked ABRs, dissociating pitch-related processing in the auditory brainstem may be challenging with natural speech stimuli.

scholarly journals Interactions Between Digital Noise Reduction and Reverberation: Acoustic and Behavioral Effects

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (01) ◽  
pp. 017-029
Author(s):  
Paul Reinhart ◽  
Pavel Zahorik ◽  
Pamela Souza
Keyword(s):  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Hearing Impairment ◽  
Hearing Aids ◽  
Background Noise ◽  
Speech Intelligibility ◽  
Spectral Subtraction ◽  
Listening Effort ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Reverberant Environments ◽  
Speech Naturalness

AbstractDigital noise reduction (DNR) processing is used in hearing aids to enhance perception in noise by classifying and suppressing the noise acoustics. However, the efficacy of DNR processing is not known under reverberant conditions where the speech-in-noise acoustics are further degraded by reverberation.The purpose of this study was to investigate acoustic and perceptual effects of DNR processing across a range of reverberant conditions for individuals with hearing impairment.This study used an experimental design to investigate the effects of varying reverberation on speech-in-noise processed with DNR.Twenty-six listeners with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing impairment participated in the study.Speech stimuli were combined with unmodulated broadband noise at several signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs). A range of reverberant conditions with realistic parameters were simulated, as well as an anechoic control condition without reverberation. Reverberant speech-in-noise signals were processed using a spectral subtraction DNR simulation. Signals were acoustically analyzed using a phase inversion technique to quantify improvement in SNR as a result of DNR processing. Sentence intelligibility and subjective ratings of listening effort, speech naturalness, and background noise comfort were examined with and without DNR processing across the conditions.Improvement in SNR was greatest in the anechoic control condition and decreased as the ratio of direct to reverberant energy decreased. There was no significant effect of DNR processing on speech intelligibility in the anechoic control condition, but there was a significant decrease in speech intelligibility with DNR processing in all of the reverberant conditions. Subjectively, listeners reported greater listening effort and lower speech naturalness with DNR processing in some of the reverberant conditions. Listeners reported higher background noise comfort with DNR processing only in the anechoic control condition.Results suggest that reverberation affects DNR processing using a spectral subtraction algorithm in such a way that decreases the ability of DNR to reduce noise without distorting the speech acoustics. Overall, DNR processing may be most beneficial in environments with little reverberation and that the use of DNR processing in highly reverberant environments may actually produce adverse perceptual effects. Further research is warranted using commercial hearing aids in realistic reverberant environments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document