ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2024
Detection of mild sensory hearing loss using a joint reflection-distortion otoacoustic emission profile.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Measuring and analyzing both nonlinear-distortion and linear-reflection otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) combined creates what we have termed a "joint-OAE profile." Here, we test whether these two classes of emissions have different sensitivities to hearing loss and whether our joint-OAE profile can detect mild-moderate hearing loss better than conventional OAE protocols have. 2f1-f2 distortion-product OAEs and stimulus-frequency OAEs were evoked with rapidly sweeping tones in 300 normal and impaired ears. Metrics included OAE amplitude for fixed-level stimuli as well as slope and compression features derived from OAE input/output functions. Results show that mild-moderate hearing loss impacts distortion and reflection emissions differently. Clinical decision theory was applied using OAE metrics to classify all ears as either normal-hearing or hearing-impaired. Our best OAE classifiers achieved 90% or better hit rates (with false positive rates of 5%-10%) for mild hearing loss, across a nearly five-octave range. In summary, results suggest that distortion and reflection emissions have distinct sensitivities to hearing loss, which supports the use of a joint-OAE approach for diagnosis. Results also indicate that analyzing both reflection and distortion OAEs together to detect mild hearing loss produces outstanding accuracy across the frequency range, exceeding that achieved by conventional OAE protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.