A within-subject comparison of adult patients using the Nucleus F0F1F2 and F0F1F2B3B4B5 speech processing strategies.
A within-subject comparison of adult patients using the Nucleus F0F1F2 and F0F1F2B3B4B5 speech processing strategies.
复制标题
使用 Nucleus F0F1F2 和 F0F1F2B3B4B5 语音处理策略对成年患者进行受试者内比较。
DOI：
10.1044/jshr.3902.261
复制
发表时间：
1996
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Gantz,BJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Parkinson,AJ;Tyler,RS;Woodworth,GG;Lowder,MW;Gantz,BJ
本研究比较了17例佩戴Mini语音处理器患者的F0F1F2和F0F1F2B3B4B5（也称为“多峰”或“Mpeak”）处理方案。所有患者使用F0F1F2处理策略至少有18个月的种植经验。在这项研究中，他们被切换到F0F1F2B3B4B5处理策略3个月。然后他们再次使用F0F1F2策略3个月，然后再次使用F0F1F2B3B4B5策略3个月，最后使用F0F1F2策略3个月。在每个间隔后，使用语音识别测试和主观评分来评估两种方案的性能。总体而言，两种处理方案的结果差异不大。在单词和句子识别方面，F0F1F2B3B4B5策略的平均表现稍好一些，但在其他任何语音测量方面都没有。采用F0F1F2B3B4B5策略治疗的8例患者疗效显著。然而，8个人中有6个人在测试组的6项言语测试中只有一项明显更好。另外两名患者在两项言语测试中表现更好。采用F0F1F2策略的3例患者在辅音识别方面也有较好的表现。对于其余的患者，两种策略在他们的表现上几乎没有区别。信息传递分析表明，F0F1F2B3B4B5策略比F0F1F2策略更有效地传递辅音时长和摩擦线索。使用一种策略的经验似乎有利于使用另一种策略的表现。
This study compares the Nucleus F0F1F2 and F0F1F2B3B4B5 (also known as “Multipeak” or “Mpeak”) processing schemes in 17 patients wearing the Mini Speech Processor. All patients had at least 18 months implant experience using the F0F1F2 processing strategy. For this study, they were switched to the F0F1F2B3B4B5 processing strategy for 3 months. They then returned to using the F0F1F2 strategy for 3 months, then used the F0F1F2B3B4B5 strategy again for 3 months, and lastly used the F0F1F2 strategy for 3 months. Performance was evaluated with both schemes after each interval, using speech recognition tests and subjective ratings. Overall, differences between the results for the two processing schemes were not large. Average performance was somewhat better for the F0F1F2B3B4B5 strategy for word and sentence identification, but not for any of the other speech measures. Superior performance was observed in 8 patients with the F0F1F2B3B4B5 strategy. However, 6 of the 8 individuals were significantly better on only one of the six speech measures in the test battery. The other 2 patients performed better on two of the speech measures. Superior performance was also observed in 3 patients with the F0F1F2 strategy for consonant recognition. For the remaining patients, there was little difference in their performance with the two strategies. Information transmission analyses indicated that the F0F1F2B3B4B5 strategy transmitted consonant duration and frication cues more efficiently than F0F1F2. Experience with one strategy appeared to benefit performance with the other strategy.
登录
查看更多内容
以前的经验是比较人工耳蜗处理方案的混杂因素。
DOI：
10.1044/jshr.2902.282
发表时间：
1986
期刊：
Journal of speech and hearing research
影响因子：
--
作者：
Tyler,RS;Preece,JP;Lansing,CR;Otto,SR;Gantz,BJ
通讯作者：
Gantz,BJ
DOI：
10.1121/1.419724
发表时间：
1997-07
期刊：
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
影响因子：
--
作者：
R. Tyler;A. Parkinson;G. Woodworth;M. Lowder;B. Gantz
通讯作者：
R. Tyler;A. Parkinson;G. Woodworth;M. Lowder;B. Gantz
DOI：
10.1044/jshr.2003.463
发表时间：
1977-01-01
期刊：
JOURNAL OF SPEECH AND HEARING RESEARCH
影响因子：
--
作者：
OWENS, E;SCHUBERT, ED
通讯作者：
SCHUBERT, ED
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
BROWN, CJ;ABBAS, PJ;GANTZ, B
通讯作者：
GANTZ, B
使用 Ineraid 人工耳蜗的患者的音调缩放和言语理解。
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Dorman,MF;Smith,L;McCandless,G;Dunnavant,G;Parkin,J;Dankowski,K
通讯作者：
Dankowski,K