Literature DB >> 29661615

A perspective on brain-behavior relationships and effects of age and hearing using speech-in-noise stimuli.

Curtis J Billings1, Brandon M Madsen2.   

Abstract

Understanding speech in background noise is often more difficult for individuals who are older and have hearing impairment than for younger, normal-hearing individuals. In fact, speech-understanding abilities among older individuals with hearing impairment varies greatly. Researchers have hypothesized that some of that variability can be explained by how the brain encodes speech signals in the presence of noise, and that brain measures may be useful for predicting behavioral performance in difficult-to-test patients. In a series of experiments, we have explored the effects of age and hearing impairment in both brain and behavioral domains with the goal of using brain measures to improve our understanding of speech-in-noise difficulties. The behavioral measures examined showed effect sizes for hearing impairment that were 6-10 dB larger than the effects of age when tested in steady-state noise, whereas electrophysiological age effects were similar in magnitude to those of hearing impairment. Both age and hearing status influence neural responses to speech as well as speech understanding in background noise. These effects can in turn be modulated by other factors, such as the characteristics of the background noise itself. Finally, the use of electrophysiology to predict performance on receptive speech-in-noise tasks holds promise, demonstrating root-mean-square prediction errors as small as 1-2 dB. An important next step in this field of inquiry is to sample the aging and hearing impairment variables continuously (rather than categorically) - across the whole lifespan and audiogram - to improve effect estimates.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aging; Brain and behavior; Correlation; Cortical auditory evoked potentials; Hearing impairment; Hearing loss; Prediction; Speech in noise; Speech perception in noise

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29661615      PMCID: PMC6636926          DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2018.03.024

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


  60 in total

1.  Methods of estimating the LD 50 in quantal response data.

Authors:  P Armitage; I Allen
Journal:  J Hyg (Lond)       Date:  1950-09

2.  Test-retest reliability of cortical evoked potentials using naturally produced speech sounds.

Authors:  K L Tremblay; L Friesen; B A Martin; R Wright
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Estimation of Signal-to-Noise Ratios in Realistic Sound Scenarios.

Authors:  Karolina Smeds; Florian Wolters; Martin Rung
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 1.664

4.  A neural basis of speech-in-noise perception in older adults.

Authors:  Samira Anderson; Alexandra Parbery-Clark; Han-Gyol Yi; Nina Kraus
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  A Large-Scale Examination of Veterans with Normal Pure-Tone Hearing Thresholds within the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Authors:  Curtis J Billings; Lauren K Dillard; Zachary B Hoskins; Tina M Penman; Kelly M Reavis
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2018 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  Neural timing is linked to speech perception in noise.

Authors:  Samira Anderson; Erika Skoe; Bharath Chandrasekaran; Nina Kraus
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-04-07       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Cortical signal-in-noise coding varies by noise type, signal-to-noise ratio, age, and hearing status.

Authors:  Nashrah Maamor; Curtis J Billings
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2016-11-09       Impact factor: 3.046

8.  Clinical experience with the words-in-noise test on 3430 veterans: comparisons with pure-tone thresholds and word recognition in quiet.

Authors:  Richard H Wilson
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Prevalence of hearing loss and differences by demographic characteristics among US adults: data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999-2004.

Authors:  Yuri Agrawal; Elizabeth A Platz; John K Niparko
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-07-28

10.  Masking of speech in young and elderly listeners with hearing loss.

Authors:  P E Souza; C W Turner
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1994-06
View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Animal-to-Human Translation Difficulties and Problems With Proposed Coding-in-Noise Deficits in Noise-Induced Synaptopathy and Hidden Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Sara Ripley; Li Xia; Zhen Zhang; Steve J Aiken; Jian Wang
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-05-23       Impact factor: 5.152

Review 2.  Objective evidence of temporal processing deficits in older adults.

Authors:  Samira Anderson; Hanin Karawani
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2020-08-16       Impact factor: 3.208

3.  Effects of Signal Type and Noise Background on Auditory Evoked Potential N1, P2, and P3 Measurements in Blast-Exposed Veterans.

Authors:  Melissa A Papesh; Alyssa A Stefl; Frederick J Gallun; Curtis J Billings
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2021 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.