现场试验使用具有主动降噪和双麦克风定向的数字助听器。

M Boymans, W A Dreschler
{"title":"现场试验使用具有主动降噪和双麦克风定向的数字助听器。","authors":"M Boymans,&nbsp;W A Dreschler","doi":"10.3109/00206090009073090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this study, we measured the effects of a digital hearing aid on speech recognition or reception in noise for two noise reduction concepts: active noise reduction by speech-sensitive processing (SSP) and improved directionality by a dual- or so-called twin-microphone system (TMS). This was conducted in a well-controlled clinical field trial in 16 hearing-aid users, using a single-blind crossover design. The hearing aid fitting was controlled by insertion gain measurements and measurements with loudness scaling. This study combined laboratory experiments with three consecutive field trials of 4 weeks each. We used performance measurements (speech recognition tests in background noise), paired comparisons, and self-report measurements (questionnaires). The speech recognition or reception tests were performed before and after each field trial, the paired comparisons were performed in weeks 4 and 12, and the questionnaires were administered after each field trial. For all subjects, results were obtained for three different settings: no noise reduction, SSP alone, and TMS alone. In the last week, we also performed speech recognition or reception tests in background noise with both noise reduction concepts combined. Three types of results have been reported: \"objective\" results from the critical signal to noise ratios for speech recognition or reception in different background noises for different settings and \"subjective\" results: paired comparisons and questionnaires. The subjective scores show the same trend as the objective scores. The effects of TMS were clearly positive, especially for the speech reception threshold tests and for the paired comparisons. The effects of SSP were much smaller but showed significant benefits with respect to aversiveness and speech perception or reception in noise for specific acoustical environments. There was no extra benefit from the combined effect of SSP and TMS relative to TMS alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":75571,"journal":{"name":"Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology","volume":"39 5","pages":"260-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/00206090009073090","citationCount":"115","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality.\",\"authors\":\"M Boymans,&nbsp;W A Dreschler\",\"doi\":\"10.3109/00206090009073090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In this study, we measured the effects of a digital hearing aid on speech recognition or reception in noise for two noise reduction concepts: active noise reduction by speech-sensitive processing (SSP) and improved directionality by a dual- or so-called twin-microphone system (TMS). This was conducted in a well-controlled clinical field trial in 16 hearing-aid users, using a single-blind crossover design. The hearing aid fitting was controlled by insertion gain measurements and measurements with loudness scaling. This study combined laboratory experiments with three consecutive field trials of 4 weeks each. We used performance measurements (speech recognition tests in background noise), paired comparisons, and self-report measurements (questionnaires). The speech recognition or reception tests were performed before and after each field trial, the paired comparisons were performed in weeks 4 and 12, and the questionnaires were administered after each field trial. For all subjects, results were obtained for three different settings: no noise reduction, SSP alone, and TMS alone. In the last week, we also performed speech recognition or reception tests in background noise with both noise reduction concepts combined. Three types of results have been reported: \\\"objective\\\" results from the critical signal to noise ratios for speech recognition or reception in different background noises for different settings and \\\"subjective\\\" results: paired comparisons and questionnaires. The subjective scores show the same trend as the objective scores. The effects of TMS were clearly positive, especially for the speech reception threshold tests and for the paired comparisons. The effects of SSP were much smaller but showed significant benefits with respect to aversiveness and speech perception or reception in noise for specific acoustical environments. There was no extra benefit from the combined effect of SSP and TMS relative to TMS alone.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology\",\"volume\":\"39 5\",\"pages\":\"260-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/00206090009073090\",\"citationCount\":\"115\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3109/00206090009073090\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/00206090009073090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 115

摘要

在这项研究中,我们测量了数字助听器在噪声中对语音识别或接收的影响,这两种降噪概念是:通过语音敏感处理(SSP)主动降噪,以及通过双麦克风系统(TMS)改善方向性。这是在16名助听器使用者中进行的一项控制良好的临床现场试验,采用单盲交叉设计。通过插入增益测量和响度标度测量来控制助听器的装配。本研究将室内实验与连续三次、每次4周的田间试验相结合。我们使用了性能测量(背景噪声下的语音识别测试)、配对比较和自我报告测量(问卷调查)。在每次现场试验前后分别进行语音识别或接收测试,在第4周和第12周进行配对比较,并在每次现场试验后进行问卷调查。对于所有受试者,在三种不同的设置下获得结果:不降噪、单独使用SSP和单独使用TMS。在上周,我们还进行了背景噪声下的语音识别或接收测试,将两种降噪概念结合起来。报告了三种类型的结果:“客观”结果,即在不同设置的不同背景噪声下语音识别或接收的关键信噪比;“主观”结果:配对比较和问卷调查。主观得分与客观得分呈现相同的趋势。经颅磁刺激的效果明显是积极的,尤其是在语音接收阈值测试和配对比较中。SSP的影响要小得多,但在特定声学环境中对厌恶和语音感知或接收方面显示出显著的好处。与单独经颅磁刺激相比,SSP和经颅磁刺激联合作用没有额外的益处。
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
Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality.

In this study, we measured the effects of a digital hearing aid on speech recognition or reception in noise for two noise reduction concepts: active noise reduction by speech-sensitive processing (SSP) and improved directionality by a dual- or so-called twin-microphone system (TMS). This was conducted in a well-controlled clinical field trial in 16 hearing-aid users, using a single-blind crossover design. The hearing aid fitting was controlled by insertion gain measurements and measurements with loudness scaling. This study combined laboratory experiments with three consecutive field trials of 4 weeks each. We used performance measurements (speech recognition tests in background noise), paired comparisons, and self-report measurements (questionnaires). The speech recognition or reception tests were performed before and after each field trial, the paired comparisons were performed in weeks 4 and 12, and the questionnaires were administered after each field trial. For all subjects, results were obtained for three different settings: no noise reduction, SSP alone, and TMS alone. In the last week, we also performed speech recognition or reception tests in background noise with both noise reduction concepts combined. Three types of results have been reported: "objective" results from the critical signal to noise ratios for speech recognition or reception in different background noises for different settings and "subjective" results: paired comparisons and questionnaires. The subjective scores show the same trend as the objective scores. The effects of TMS were clearly positive, especially for the speech reception threshold tests and for the paired comparisons. The effects of SSP were much smaller but showed significant benefits with respect to aversiveness and speech perception or reception in noise for specific acoustical environments. There was no extra benefit from the combined effect of SSP and TMS relative to TMS alone.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Prevalence of sensorineural hearing loss in children in Costa Rica. Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality. Predictive factors for the severity of tinnitus. Ototoxic interaction between noise and pheomelanin: distortion product otoacoustic emissions after acoustical trauma in chloroquine-treated red, black, and albino guinea pigs. Aging and external ear resonance.
×
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