Literature DB >> 22546328

Relationships between otoacoustic emissions and a proxy measure of cochlear length derived from the auditory brainstem response.

Dennis McFadden1, Adrian Garcia-Sierra, Michelle D Hsieh, Mindy M Maloney, Craig A Champlin, Edward G Pasanen.   

Abstract

Brief tones of 1.0 and 8.0 kHz were used to evoke auditory brainstem responses (ABRs), and the differences between the wave-V latencies for those two frequencies were used as a proxy for cochlear length. The tone bursts (8 ms in duration including 2-ms rise/fall times, and 82 dB in level) were, or were not, accompanied by a continuous, moderately intense noise band, highpass filtered immediately above the tone. The proxy values for length were compared with various measures of otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) obtained from the same ears. All the correlations were low, suggesting that cochlear length, as measured by this proxy at least, is not strongly related to the various group and individual differences that exist in OAEs. Female latencies did not differ across the menstrual cycle, and the proxy length measure exhibited no sex difference (either for menses females vs. males or midluteal females vs. males) when the highpass noises were used. However, when the subjects were partitioned into Whites and Non-Whites, a substantial sex difference in cochlear length did emerge for the White group, although the correlations with OAEs remained low. Head size was not highly correlated with any of the ABR measures.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22546328      PMCID: PMC3371143          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2012.04.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hear Res        ISSN: 0378-5955            Impact factor:   3.208


  44 in total

1.  An examination of gender differences in DPOAE phase delay measurements in normal-hearing human adults.

Authors:  D M Bowman; D K Brown; B P Kimberley
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  Differences by sex, ear, and sexual orientation in the time intervals between successive peaks in auditory evoked potentials.

Authors:  Dennis McFadden; Michelle D Hsieh; Adrian Garcia-Sierra; Craig A Champlin
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-09-27       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Additional findings on heritability and prenatal masculinization of cochlear mechanisms: click-evoked otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  D McFadden; J C Loehlin; E G Pasanen
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 3.208

Review 4.  Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs.

Authors:  C A Shera; J J Guinan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Gender differences in cochlear response time: an explanation for gender amplitude differences in the unmasked auditory brain-stem response.

Authors:  M Don; C W Ponton; J J Eggermont; A Masuda
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  New off-line method for detecting spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in human subjects.

Authors:  C L Talmadge; G R Long; W J Murphy; A Tubis
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  CT-derived estimation of cochlear morphology and electrode array position in relation to word recognition in Nucleus-22 recipients.

Authors:  Margaret W Skinner; Darlene R Ketten; Laura K Holden; Gary W Harding; Peter G Smith; George A Gates; J Gail Neely; G Robert Kletzker; Barry Brunsden; Barbara Blocker
Journal:  J Assoc Res Otolaryngol       Date:  2002-02-27

8.  Multicomponent acoustic distortion product otoacoustic emission phase in humans. I. General characteristics.

Authors:  A Moulin; D T Kemp
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 1.840

9.  Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in a nonhuman primate. II. Cochlear anatomy.

Authors:  B L Lonsbury-Martin; G K Martin; R Probst; A C Coats
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Location of structurally similar areas in chinchilla cochleas of different lengths.

Authors:  B A Bohne; C D Carr
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1979-08       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  3 in total

1.  Comparing behavioral and physiological measures of combination tones: sex and race differences.

Authors:  Dennis McFadden; Edward G Pasanen; Erin M Leshikar; Michelle D Hsieh; Mindy M Maloney
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Differences in common psychoacoustical tasks by sex, menstrual cycle, and race.

Authors:  Dennis McFadden; Edward G Pasanen; Mindy M Maloney; Erin M Leshikar; Michelle H Pho
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Auditory evoked potentials: Differences by sex, race, and menstrual cycle and correlations with common psychoacoustical tasks.

Authors:  Dennis McFadden; Craig A Champlin; Michelle H Pho; Edward G Pasanen; Mindy M Maloney; Erin M Leshikar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.