Contributions of Peripheral Spatial Resolution to Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users Statistical Consulting February 11, 2013 8:30 – 9:20 am 30.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
School of Electrical and Computer Engineering Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering Thomas M. Talavage, PhD Associate Professor, Electrical and Computer.
Advertisements

Cochlear Implants The cochlear implant is the most significant technical advance in the treatment of hearing impairment since the development of the hearing.
MIMICKING THE HUMAN EAR Philipos Loizou (author) Oliver Johnson (me)
More From Music music through a cochlear implant Dr Rachel van Besouw Hearing & Balance Centre, ISVR.
Kevin Otto Research: More than 28 million Americans have some form of hearing loss. Deafness etiology generally mandates treatment option. Treatment options.
David J. Ertmer, Ph.D. Associate Professor Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences Your picture here.
Vocal Emotion Recognition with Cochlear Implants Xin Luo, Qian-Jie Fu, John J. Galvin III Presentation By Archie Archibong.
Electrophysiologic Measures of Ulnar Sensory Nerve Function: Electrophysiologic Measures of Ulnar Sensory Nerve Function: Reference Values and Reliability.
Scaled Scoring.
© 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. Chapter 14 Using Multivariate Design and Analysis.
Relationship between perception of spectral ripple and speech recognition in cochlear implant and vocoder listeners L.M. Litvak, A.J. Spahr, A.A. Saoji,
1 New Technique for Improving Speech Intelligibility for the Hearing Impaired Miriam Furst-Yust School of Electrical Engineering Tel Aviv University.
Experimental Group Designs
Cochlear Implants By Di’Aundria Davis.
NHS nd International Conference on Newborn Hearing Screening, Diagnosis, and Intervention Como, Italy May 31, 2002 Progress in Specific Language.
Iona Ross BME 281 October 18,  More than 600 million people worldwide (10%) suffer from hearing impairments  250 million people worldwide have.
Ruth Litovsky University of Wisconsin Madison, WI USA Brain Plasticity and Development in Children and Adults with Cochlear Implants
Cochlear Implants American Sign Language Children & Cochlear Implants Psychological Evaluation of Implant Candidates James H. Johnson, Ph.D., ABPP Department.
Clinical Applications
Behavioral and electrophysiological results in auditory processing disorders Luciana Macedo de Resende PhD.
Speech Based Optimization of Hearing Devices Alice E. Holmes, Rahul Shrivastav, Hannah W. Siburt & Lee Krause.
Studies of Information Coding in the Auditory Nerve Laurel H. Carney Syracuse University Institute for Sensory Research Departments of Biomedical & Chemical.
Frank E. Musiek, Ph.D., Jennifer Shinn, M.S., and Christine Hare, M. A.
Sh s Children with CIs produce ‘s’ with a lower spectral peak than their peers with NH, but both groups of children produce ‘sh’ similarly [1]. This effect.
Need for cortical evoked potentials Assessment and determination of amplification benefit in actual hearing aid users is an issue that continues to be.
COCHLEAR IMPLANTS Brittany M. Alphonse Biomedical Engineering BME 181.
Cochlear Implantation at King Abdullaziz University Hospital, Riyadh: A Multisystem Prgram, ( )
Single sample One-tailed versus two-tailed tests One-tailed versus two-tailed tests t-test: t-test:Use Significance level (type I and II errors) Degrees.
To examine the feasibility of using confusion matrices from speech recognition tests to identify impaired channels, impairments in this study were simulated.
1 Cross-language evidence for three factors in speech perception Sandra Anacleto uOttawa.
Cochlear Implants: A Closer Look 11/13/2006. What is a Cochlear Implant (CI)? According to the National Institute on Deafness and other Communication.
Scaling Studies of Perceived Source Width Juha Merimaa Institut für Kommunikationsakustik Ruhr-Universität Bochum.
Two-Way (Independent) ANOVA. PSYC 6130A, PROF. J. ELDER 2 Two-Way ANOVA “Two-Way” means groups are defined by 2 independent variables. These IVs are typically.
Predicting the Intelligibility of Cochlear-implant Vocoded Speech from Objective Quality Measure(1) Department of Electrical Engineering, The University.
Efficient Encoding of Vocalizations in the Auditory Midbrain Lars Holmstrom Systems Science PhD Program Portland State University.
© 2006 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 Chapter 11 Testing for Differences Differences betweens groups or categories of the independent.
HEARING Module 20. Hearing – sound waves  Audition – the sense or act of hearing  Frequency – the number of complete wavelengths that pass a point in.
What can we expect of cochlear implants for listening to speech in noisy environments? Andrew Faulkner: UCL Speech Hearing and Phonetic Sciences.
Computer Architecture and Networks Lab. 컴퓨터 구조 및 네트워크 연구실 Middle-Latency Auditory Evoked Potentials : Basic Issues and Potentials Applications(3/3) 2009.
Date of download: 6/3/2016 Copyright © 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. From: Outcomes for Cochlear Implant Users With Significant.
Artificial Cochlear Implants Geoff Norman 4/18/16
Oregon Health & Science University
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
D I S C U S S I O N & C O N C L U S I O N
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Journal of Vision. 2009;9(6):2. doi: /9.6.2 Figure Legend:
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Aging, Cognitive Decline and Hearing Loss: Effects of Auditory Rehabilitation and Training with Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants on Cognitive Function.
Figure 1 The pattern reversal stimuli
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
SPATIAL SPREAD MEASUREMENTS
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Journal of Vision. 2013;13(4):21. doi: / Figure Legend:
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Date of download: 11/6/2017 Copyright © ASME. All rights reserved.
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Cassidy Hinson ASL 1 Semester 2
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
A proposed Proof-of-Concept experiment
Research Design & Analysis II: Class 10
Fang Du, Dr. Christina L. Runge, Dr. Yi Hu. April 21, 2018
Ian M. Finn, Nicholas J. Priebe, David Ferster  Neuron 
Gregory O. Hjelmstad, Roger A. Nicoll, Robert C. Malenka  Neuron 
Volume 49, Issue 3, Pages (February 2006)
EAR REVIEW.
Volume 35, Issue 3, Pages (August 2002)
Presentation transcript:

Contributions of Peripheral Spatial Resolution to Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users Statistical Consulting February 11, :30 – 9:20 am 30 Schaeffer Hall

Background Personal – Clinical Audiologist – PhD Student in Hearing Science working on Dissertation Research Project – Cochlear Implant Users

Two Prevailing Questions in Cochlear Implant Research Why is there so much variability in performance among individuals who use cochlear implants? When children are implanted, how can we form realistic expectations about their potential performance? How can the clinician ensure that the device is programmed optimally?

Cochlear Implant Auditory Nerve CortexPerception ECAPACCSpeech Hearing Loss SimpleComplex

ECAP Channel Interaction Functions – Thirteen channel interaction functions total – Quantified as an area of separation (channel separation index) between two functions Goal 1. Auditory Nerve and Cortex

Simple ACC – Thirteen electrode pairs to assess discrimination

Can ECAP channel separation indices predict simple ACC amplitude? Sub-question: Are there 2 unique curves or just 1? F19R E60 Assume a monotonically increasing, saturating function: y=a(1-e -x/b )

Goal 2. Simple versus Complex Stimulation Complex ACC – Three experimental speech processor programs, each uses a different subset of 7 electrodes from the 13 used for ECAP and simple ACC measures P1 XXXXXXX P2 X X X X X X X P3 X X X X X X X

Goal 2. Simple versus Complex Stimulation Three sets cortical responses to complex stimuli.

Can ECAP channel separation indices and/or cortical responses to electrode changes predict a cortical response to a complex change?

Goal 3. Speech Perception Three vowel perception scores (% correct), one for each experimental program. Three “signal-to-noise ratios” for 50% correct, one for each experimental program.

Can ECAP channel separation indices, cortical responses to electrode changes and/or cortical responses to complex changes predict speech perception? *Repeat analysis using a speech-in-noise test as the speech perception measure.*

Progress to Date and Plans Data Collection: – 2 pilot subjects have completed testing – Plan: 10 subjects total Decisions I still have to make: – ECAP: use raw or normalized amplitudes – ECAP: use an average or maximum separation index – Simple ACC: use raw or normalized peak-to-peak amplitudes or raw or normalized rms amplitudes – Complex ACC: ripple depth threshold or rms amplitude at a set ripple depth

Project Summary Goal 1: Auditory Nerve versus Cortex for Simple Stimulation – 13 ECAP Channel Separation Indices (6 Basal, 6 Apical, 1 Zero Point) – 13 Spatial ACC (6 Basal, 6 Apical, 1 Zero Point) Goal 2: Simple versus Complex Stimulation – 3 ECAP Channel Separation Indices (average of the adjacent electrodes in the experimental program) – 3 Calculated Simple ACC Amplitudes—from the coefficients determined in Goal 1 – 3 Ripple Depth Thresholds from Complex ACC Amplitudes Goal 3: Speech Perception – 3 ECAP Channel Separation Indices – 3 Calculated Simple ACC Amplitudes—from the coefficients determined in Goal 1 – 3 Ripple Depth Thresholds from Complex ACC Amplitudes – 3 Vowel Perception Scores – 3 Speech-in-noise Scores