Literature DB >> 11956533

Speech recognition in background noise of cochlear implant patients.

Bruce L Fetterman1, Elizabeth H Domico.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The performances of adult patients using Spectral peak (Nucleus 22 or Nucleus 24 patients) or Continuous Interleaved Sampling or Advanced Combination Encoder (Clarion patients) were evaluated in their ability to perform in quiet and in 2 levels of background noise. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ninety-six patients were tested with the City University of New York Sentences presented at 70 dB in quiet and at signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) of +10 and +5 dB. Patients were scored on the number of words perceived correctly.
RESULTS: Scores were different at each condition (P < 0.05): 88% words correct in quiet, 73% correct at an SNR of +10 dB, and 47% correct at an SNR of +5 dB. Linear regression analysis found no significant correlation between test score and age at implantation or time using the implant. A weak negative correlation was found between years of hearing loss and score.
CONCLUSION: Competing noise interferes with comprehension of connected speech for most cochlear implant patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11956533     DOI: 10.1067/mhn.2002.123044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg        ISSN: 0194-5998            Impact factor:   3.497


  24 in total

1.  Perception of speech produced by native and nonnative talkers by listeners with normal hearing and listeners with cochlear implants.

Authors:  Caili Ji; John J Galvin; Yi-ping Chang; Anting Xu; Qian-Jie Fu
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  Music Therapy for Preschool Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Kate Gfeller; Virginia Driscoll; Maura Kenworthy; Tanya Van Voorst
Journal:  Music Ther Perspect       Date:  2011-06

3.  How Do You Deal With Uncertainty? Cochlear Implant Users Differ in the Dynamics of Lexical Processing of Noncanonical Inputs.

Authors:  Bob McMurray; Tyler P Ellis; Keith S Apfelbaum
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2019 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Effects of electrode separation between speech and noise signals on consonant identification in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Bom Jun Kwon
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  The Effects of Preprocessing Strategies for Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Bernadette Rakszawski; Rose Wright; Jamie H Cadieux; Lisa S Davidson; Christine Brenner
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  Environment-adaptive speech enhancement for bilateral cochlear implants using a single processor.

Authors:  Taher S Mirzahasanloo; Nasser Kehtarnavaz; Vanishree Gopalakrishna; Philipos C Loizou
Journal:  Speech Commun       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 2.017

7.  Age effects on perceptual restoration of degraded interrupted sentences.

Authors:  Brittany N Jaekel; Rochelle S Newman; Matthew J Goupell
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Spoken word recognition in noise in Mandarin-speaking pediatric cochlear implant users.

Authors:  Cuncun Ren; Jing Yang; Dingjun Zha; Ying Lin; Haihong Liu; Ying Kong; Sha Liu; Li Xu
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 1.675

9.  Evaluation of different signal processing options in unilateral and bilateral cochlear freedom implant recipients using R-Space background noise.

Authors:  Alison M Brockmeyer; Lisa G Potts
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 1.664

Review 10.  Single and multiple microphone noise reduction strategies in cochlear implants.

Authors:  Kostas Kokkinakis; Behnam Azimi; Yi Hu; David R Friedland
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2012-08-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.