Name
Title | ||
|---|---|---|
Comparing Auditory Brainstem Responses Evoked By Click And Sweep-Tone In Normal-Hearing Adults |
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Auditory brainstem response (ABR) is an objective method via which hearing loss could be detected. ABR induced by click, a broadband signal, is generally considered as the gold standard. However, due to the inherent delay of the cochlear traveling wave, click cannot excite the entire cochlear basement membrane at the same time, leading to the attenuation of the induced ABR waveform. In order to resolve this limitation, a sweep-tone-based stimulus that reconstructs the arrival time of different frequency components with respect to the delay characteristics of cochlear basement membrane was designed and used to induce ABR in this study. Subsequently, we compared the performance of the proposed sweep-tone-induced ABR method and the commonly adopted click induced ABR at different test levels and different stimulus rates. And the obtained results showed that the waveform morphology of sweep-tone-induced ABR was significantly better than that of click induced ABR across different test levels and stimulus rates. Moreover, compared to the click induced ABR at different sweeps, we found that the proposed sweep-tone-induced ABR effectively induced the ABR waveform at a relatively faster rate. Hence, the proposed sweep-tone-induced ABR approach provides a new method to improve the sensitivity of ABR detection in hearing loss. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2019 | 10.1109/EMBC.2019.8856452 | 2019 41ST ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE IEEE ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY SOCIETY (EMBC) |
Field | DocType | Volume |
Computer vision,Auditory brainstem response,Traveling wave,Computer science,Waveform,Auditory system,Hearing loss,Artificial intelligence,Stimulus (physiology),Objective method,Audiology,Brainstem | Conference | 2019 |
ISSN | Citations | PageRank |
1557-170X | 0 | 0.34 |
References | Authors | |
0 | 13 | |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yanbing Jiang | 1 | 0 | 0.34 |
| Dan Wang | 2 | 1 | 2.04 |
| Zhenzhen Liu | 3 | 0 | 0.34 |
| Jingqian Tan | 4 | 0 | 0.34 |
| O. W. Samuel | 5 | 161 | 22.87 |
| Hanjie Deng | 6 | 0 | 1.35 |
| Xin Wang | 7 | 587 | 177.85 |
| Mingxing Zhu | 8 | 1 | 6.03 |
| Xiaochen Wang | 9 | 0 | 0.34 |
| Shurui Sun | 10 | 0 | 0.34 |
| Peng Li | 11 | 275 | 69.71 |
| Shixiong Chen | 12 | 25 | 12.77 |
| Guanglin Li | 13 | 314 | 57.23 |