Literature DB >> 20109081

AMTAS: automated method for testing auditory sensitivity: validation studies.

Robert H Margolis1, Brian R Glasberg, Sarah Creeke, Brian C J Moore.   

Abstract

Three studies are reported assessing the validity of AMTAS, an automated method for obtaining an audiogram, including air- and bone-conduction thresholds (stimuli delivered by a forehead-placed transducer) with masking noise presented to the non-test ear. In Study 1, six subjects at each of three sites were tested using manual audiometry by two audiologists at each site. The mean differences between the audiograms for the paired audiologists provided a measure of the reliability of traditional audiometry. In Study 2, thirty subjects (5 normal hearing, 25 hearing impaired) were tested using AMTAS and manual audiometry. For air-conduction thresholds, AMTAS-manual differences were similar to inter-tester differences in Study 1, but for bone-conduction thresholds, the former were larger. Two possible sources of the greater differences were identified, (1) incorrect reference-equivalent threshold force levels for forehead bone conduction, and (2) a differential effect of middle-ear disease on forehead and mastoid bone-conduction thresholds. In Study 3, intersubject variability was studied for forehead and mastoid bone-conduction thresholds. The results indicate similar variability for the two placement sites.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20109081     DOI: 10.3109/14992020903092608

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Audiol        ISSN: 1499-2027            Impact factor:   2.117


  22 in total

1.  A self-fitting hearing aid: need and concept.

Authors:  Elizabeth Convery; Gitte Keidser; Harvey Dillon; Lisa Hartley
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2011-12-04

2.  Threshold measurements by self-fitting hearing aids: feasibility and challenges.

Authors:  Gitte Keidser; Harvey Dillon; Dan Zhou; Lyndal Carter
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2012-03-07

3.  Distribution characteristics of normal pure-tone thresholds.

Authors:  Robert H Margolis; Richard H Wilson; Gerald R Popelka; Robert H Eikelboom; De Wet Swanepoel; George L Saly
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 2.117

4.  Distribution Characteristics of Air-Bone Gaps: Evidence of Bias in Manual Audiometry.

Authors:  Robert H Margolis; Richard H Wilson; Gerald R Popelka; Robert H Eikelboom; De Wet Swanepoel; George L Saly
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Comparing the Accuracy and Speed of Manual and Tracking Methods of Measuring Hearing Thresholds.

Authors:  Gayla L Poling; Theresa J Kunnel; Sumitrajit Dhar
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Home Hearing Test: Within-Subjects Threshold Variability.

Authors:  Robert H Margolis; Gene Bratt; M Patrick Feeney; Mead C Killion; George L Saly
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Sep/Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Analytical methods for evaluating reliability and validity of mobile audiometry tools.

Authors:  Mona Kelkar; Zhaoxun Hou; Gary C Curhan; Sharon G Curhan; Molin Wang
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2022-07       Impact factor: 2.482

8.  Fast, Continuous Audiogram Estimation Using Machine Learning.

Authors:  Xinyu D Song; Brittany M Wallace; Jacob R Gardner; Noah M Ledbetter; Kilian Q Weinberger; Dennis L Barbour
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2015 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Development of Improved Software Intelligent System for Audiological Solutions.

Authors:  S Rajkumar; S Muttan; V Sapthagirivasan; V Jaya; S S Vignesh
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2018-06-02       Impact factor: 4.460

10.  The new age of play audiometry: prospective validation testing of an iPad-based play audiometer.

Authors:  Jeffrey Yeung; Hedyeh Javidnia; Sophie Heley; Yves Beauregard; Sandra Champagne; Matthew Bromwich
Journal:  J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2013-03-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.