These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effect of Stimulus Level and Bandwidth on Speech-Evoked Envelope Following Responses in Adults With Normal Hearing.
    Author: Easwar V, Purcell DW, Aiken SJ, Parsa V, Scollie SD.
    Journal: Ear Hear; 2015; 36(6):619-34. PubMed ID: 26226607.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: The use of auditory evoked potentials as an objective outcome measure in infants fitted with hearing aids has gained interest in recent years. This article proposes a test paradigm using speech-evoked envelope following responses (EFRs) for use as an objective-aided outcome measure. The method uses a running speech-like, naturally spoken stimulus token /susa∫i/ (fundamental frequency [f0] = 98 Hz; duration 2.05 sec), to elicit EFRs by eight carriers representing low, mid, and high frequencies. Each vowel elicited two EFRs simultaneously, one from the region of formant one (F1) and one from the higher formants region (F2+). The simultaneous recording of two EFRs was enabled by lowering f0 in the region of F1 alone. Fricatives were amplitude modulated to enable recording of EFRs from high-frequency spectral regions. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of level and bandwidth on speech-evoked EFRs in adults with normal hearing. As well, the study aimed to test convergent validity of the EFR paradigm by comparing it with changes in behavioral tasks due to bandwidth. DESIGN: Single-channel electroencephalogram was recorded from the vertex to the nape of the neck over 300 sweeps in two polarities from 20 young adults with normal hearing. To evaluate the effects of level in experiment I, EFRs were recorded at test levels of 50 and 65 dB SPL. To evaluate the effects of bandwidth in experiment II, EFRs were elicited by /susa∫i/ low-pass filtered at 1, 2, and 4 kHz, presented at 65 dB SPL. The 65 dB SPL condition from experiment I represented the full bandwidth condition. EFRs were averaged across the two polarities and estimated using a Fourier analyzer. An F test was used to determine whether an EFR was detected. Speech discrimination using the University of Western Ontario Distinctive Feature Differences test and sound quality rating using the Multiple Stimulus Hidden Reference and Anchors paradigm were measured in identical bandwidth conditions. RESULTS: In experiment I, the increase in level resulted in a significant increase in response amplitudes for all eight carriers (mean increase of 14 to 50 nV) and the number of detections (mean increase of 1.4 detections). In experiment II, an increase in bandwidth resulted in a significant increase in the number of EFRs detected until the low-pass filtered 4 kHz condition and carrier-specific changes in response amplitude until the full bandwidth condition. Scores in both behavioral tasks increased with bandwidth up to the full bandwidth condition. The number of detections and composite amplitude (sum of all eight EFR amplitudes) significantly correlated with changes in behavioral test scores. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the EFR paradigm is sensitive to changes in level and audible bandwidth. This may be a useful tool as an objective-aided outcome measure considering its running speech-like stimulus, representation of spectral regions important for speech understanding, level and bandwidth sensitivity, and clinically feasible test times. This paradigm requires further validation in individuals with hearing loss, with and without hearing aids.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]