人类操作性无声噪声间隙检测范式的优化

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES Journal of integrative neuroscience Pub Date : 2024-09-29 DOI:10.31083/j.jin2310183
Louis Negri, Patrick Oliver, Rebecca Mitchell, Lavanya Sinha, Jacob Kearney, Dominic Saad, Fernando R Nodal, Victoria M Bajo
{"title":"人类操作性无声噪声间隙检测范式的优化","authors":"Louis Negri, Patrick Oliver, Rebecca Mitchell, Lavanya Sinha, Jacob Kearney, Dominic Saad, Fernando R Nodal, Victoria M Bajo","doi":"10.31083/j.jin2310183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the auditory domain, temporal resolution is the ability to respond to rapid changes in the envelope of a sound over time. Silent gap-in-noise detection tests assess temporal resolution. Whether temporal resolution is impaired in tinnitus and whether those tests are useful for identifying the condition is still debated. We have revisited these questions by assessing the silent gap-in-noise detection performance of human participants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were seventy-one young adults with normal hearing, separated into preliminary, tinnitus and matched-control groups. A preliminary group (n = 18) was used to optimise the silent gap-in-noise detection two-alternative forced-choice paradigm by examining the effect of the position and the salience of the gap. Temporal resolution was tested in case-control observational study of tinnitus (n = 20) and matched-control (n = 33) groups using the previously optimized silent gap-in-noise behavioral paradigm. These two groups were also tested using silent gap prepulse inhibition of the auditory startle reflex (GPIAS) and Auditory Brain Responses (ABRs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the preliminary group, reducing the predictability and saliency of the silent gap increased detection thresholds and reduced gap detection sensitivity (slope of the psychometric function). In the case-control study, tinnitus participants had higher gap detection thresholds than controls for narrowband noise stimuli centred at 2 and 8 kHz, with no differences in GPIAS or ABRs. In addition, ABR data showed latency differences across the different tinnitus subgroups stratified by subject severity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Operant silent gap-in-noise detection is impaired in tinnitus when the paradigm is optimized to reduce the predictability and saliency of the silent gap and to avoid the ceiling effect. Our behavioral paradigm can distinguish tinnitus and control groups suggesting that temporal resolution is impaired in tinnitus. However, in young adults with normal hearing, the paradigm is unable to objectively identify tinnitus at the individual level. The GPIAS paradigm was unable to differentiate the tinnitus and control groups, suggesting that operant, as opposed to reflexive, silent gap-in-noise detection is a more sensitive measure for objectively identifying tinnitus.</p>","PeriodicalId":16160,"journal":{"name":"Journal of integrative neuroscience","volume":"23 10","pages":"183"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimization of the Operant Silent Gap-in-Noise Detection Paradigm in Humans.\",\"authors\":\"Louis Negri, Patrick Oliver, Rebecca Mitchell, Lavanya Sinha, Jacob Kearney, Dominic Saad, Fernando R Nodal, Victoria M Bajo\",\"doi\":\"10.31083/j.jin2310183\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the auditory domain, temporal resolution is the ability to respond to rapid changes in the envelope of a sound over time. Silent gap-in-noise detection tests assess temporal resolution. Whether temporal resolution is impaired in tinnitus and whether those tests are useful for identifying the condition is still debated. We have revisited these questions by assessing the silent gap-in-noise detection performance of human participants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were seventy-one young adults with normal hearing, separated into preliminary, tinnitus and matched-control groups. A preliminary group (n = 18) was used to optimise the silent gap-in-noise detection two-alternative forced-choice paradigm by examining the effect of the position and the salience of the gap. Temporal resolution was tested in case-control observational study of tinnitus (n = 20) and matched-control (n = 33) groups using the previously optimized silent gap-in-noise behavioral paradigm. These two groups were also tested using silent gap prepulse inhibition of the auditory startle reflex (GPIAS) and Auditory Brain Responses (ABRs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the preliminary group, reducing the predictability and saliency of the silent gap increased detection thresholds and reduced gap detection sensitivity (slope of the psychometric function). In the case-control study, tinnitus participants had higher gap detection thresholds than controls for narrowband noise stimuli centred at 2 and 8 kHz, with no differences in GPIAS or ABRs. In addition, ABR data showed latency differences across the different tinnitus subgroups stratified by subject severity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Operant silent gap-in-noise detection is impaired in tinnitus when the paradigm is optimized to reduce the predictability and saliency of the silent gap and to avoid the ceiling effect. Our behavioral paradigm can distinguish tinnitus and control groups suggesting that temporal resolution is impaired in tinnitus. However, in young adults with normal hearing, the paradigm is unable to objectively identify tinnitus at the individual level. The GPIAS paradigm was unable to differentiate the tinnitus and control groups, suggesting that operant, as opposed to reflexive, silent gap-in-noise detection is a more sensitive measure for objectively identifying tinnitus.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of integrative neuroscience\",\"volume\":\"23 10\",\"pages\":\"183\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of integrative neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31083/j.jin2310183\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of integrative neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31083/j.jin2310183","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在听觉领域,时间分辨率是指对声音包络随时间发生的快速变化做出反应的能力。无声噪声间隙检测测试可评估时间分辨率。耳鸣患者的时间分辨率是否受损,以及这些测试是否有助于识别耳鸣,目前仍存在争议。我们通过评估人类参与者的无声噪声间隙检测性能,重新探讨了这些问题:参与者为 71 名听力正常的年轻人,分为初步组、耳鸣组和匹配对照组。初试组(n = 18)通过考察间隙的位置和显著性的影响,优化了无声间隙噪声检测二选一强迫选择范式。在耳鸣病例对照观察研究(n = 20)和匹配对照组(n = 33)中,使用先前优化的无声噪声间隙行为范式测试了时间分辨率。这两组还使用听觉惊跳反射的无声间隙前脉冲抑制(GPIAS)和听觉脑反应(ABRs)进行了测试:在初步研究组中,降低无声间隙的可预测性和显著性会提高检测阈值并降低间隙检测灵敏度(心理测量函数斜率)。在病例对照研究中,与对照组相比,耳鸣参与者在以 2 和 8 kHz 为中心的窄带噪声刺激下的间隙检测阈值更高,但 GPIAS 或 ABR 没有差异。此外,根据受试者的严重程度,不同耳鸣亚组的 ABR 数据显示出潜伏期差异:结论:当对范式进行优化以降低无声间隙的可预测性和显著性并避免天花板效应时,耳鸣患者的操作性无声间隙噪声检测会受到损害。我们的行为范式可以区分耳鸣组和对照组,这表明耳鸣患者的时间分辨率受损。然而,对于听力正常的年轻人来说,该范式无法客观地从个体层面识别耳鸣。GPIAS范式无法区分耳鸣组和对照组,这表明操作性而非反射性的无声噪声间隙检测是客观识别耳鸣的更灵敏的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Optimization of the Operant Silent Gap-in-Noise Detection Paradigm in Humans.

Background: In the auditory domain, temporal resolution is the ability to respond to rapid changes in the envelope of a sound over time. Silent gap-in-noise detection tests assess temporal resolution. Whether temporal resolution is impaired in tinnitus and whether those tests are useful for identifying the condition is still debated. We have revisited these questions by assessing the silent gap-in-noise detection performance of human participants.

Methods: Participants were seventy-one young adults with normal hearing, separated into preliminary, tinnitus and matched-control groups. A preliminary group (n = 18) was used to optimise the silent gap-in-noise detection two-alternative forced-choice paradigm by examining the effect of the position and the salience of the gap. Temporal resolution was tested in case-control observational study of tinnitus (n = 20) and matched-control (n = 33) groups using the previously optimized silent gap-in-noise behavioral paradigm. These two groups were also tested using silent gap prepulse inhibition of the auditory startle reflex (GPIAS) and Auditory Brain Responses (ABRs).

Results: In the preliminary group, reducing the predictability and saliency of the silent gap increased detection thresholds and reduced gap detection sensitivity (slope of the psychometric function). In the case-control study, tinnitus participants had higher gap detection thresholds than controls for narrowband noise stimuli centred at 2 and 8 kHz, with no differences in GPIAS or ABRs. In addition, ABR data showed latency differences across the different tinnitus subgroups stratified by subject severity.

Conclusions: Operant silent gap-in-noise detection is impaired in tinnitus when the paradigm is optimized to reduce the predictability and saliency of the silent gap and to avoid the ceiling effect. Our behavioral paradigm can distinguish tinnitus and control groups suggesting that temporal resolution is impaired in tinnitus. However, in young adults with normal hearing, the paradigm is unable to objectively identify tinnitus at the individual level. The GPIAS paradigm was unable to differentiate the tinnitus and control groups, suggesting that operant, as opposed to reflexive, silent gap-in-noise detection is a more sensitive measure for objectively identifying tinnitus.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
5.60%
发文量
173
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: JIN is an international peer-reviewed, open access journal. JIN publishes leading-edge research at the interface of theoretical and experimental neuroscience, focusing across hierarchical levels of brain organization to better understand how diverse functions are integrated. We encourage submissions from scientists of all specialties that relate to brain functioning.
期刊最新文献
The Modulatory Effect of Exogenous Orienting on Audiovisual Emotional Integration: An ERP Study. Precise 3D Localization of Intracerebral Implants Using a Simple Brain Clearing Method. The Regulatory Effect of Insulin-Like Growth Factor-2 on Hypothalamic Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Neurons during the Pubertal Period. Insular Epilepsy: Functions, Diagnostic Approaches, and Surgical Interventions. MRI-Negative Temporal Lobe Epilepsy: A Study of Brain Structure in Adults Using Surface-Based Morphological Features.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1