Comparing neural response telemetry amplitude growth functions with loudness growth functions: Preliminary results

Ear and Hearing

Volumn 28, Issue SUPPL.2, 2007, Pages

  Lai, Wai Kong ^a   Dillier, Norbert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AMPLITUDE MODULATION; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EVOKED RESPONSE; GROWTH; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; LOUDNESS; NERVE POTENTIAL; PERCEPTION; PREDICTION; STIMULATION; TELEMETRY; TEMPORAL SUMMATION;

AUDITORY PERCEPTION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; COCHLEAR IMPLANTS; COCHLEAR NERVE; DEAFNESS; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; PSYCHOPHYSICS; TELEMETRY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 34247571443     PISSN: 01960202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3180315104     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Blamey, P. J., Dooley, G. J., James, C. J., & Parisi, E. S. (2000). Monaural and binaural loudness measures in cochlear implant users with contralateral residual hearing. Ear and Hearing, 21, 6-17.
2. Fu, Q. (2004). Loudness growth in cochlear implants: effect of stimulation rate and electrode configuration. Hearing Research, 202, 55-62.
3. Harrison, R. V., & Aran, J.-M. (1982). Loudness recruitment: contributing mechanisms as revealed by cochlear AP measures in man. Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 236, 203-210.
4. McKay, C. M., Fewster, L., & Dawson, P. (2005). A different approach to using Neural Response Telemetry for automated cochlear implant processor programming. Ear and Hearing, 26, 38S-44S.
5. Shannon, R. V. (1985). Threshold and loudness functions for pulsatile stimulation of cochlear implants. Hearing Research, 18, 135-143.
6. Zeng, F. G., & Shannon, R. V. (1994). Loudness growth in electrical stimulation. In I. J. Hochmair-Desoyer & E. S. Hochmair (Eds.), Advances in Cochlear Implants (pp. 339-341). Vienna, Austria: Manz.
7. Zimmerling, M. J.,&Hochmair, E. S. (2002). EAP recordings in ineraid patients - correlations with psychophysical measures and possible implications for patient fitting. Ear and Hearing, 23, 81-91.