The importance of auricular prostheses for speech recognition

Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery

Volumn 10, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 321-328

  Walsh, William E ^a,e   Dougherty, Brian ^c   Reisberg, David J ^b   Applebaum, Edward L ^a   Shah, Chirag ^a   O'Donnell, Patrick ^d   Richter, Claus Peter ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^c ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS IN IRELAND   (Ireland)

^d TEMPLE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e Louisiana State University School of Medicine Shreveport   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CHILD; EXTERNAL EAR; HUMAN; NOISE; PHYSIOLOGY; PROSTHESES AND ORTHOSES; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ADULT; CHILD; EAR, EXTERNAL; HUMANS; NOISE; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 52749091653     PISSN: 15212491     EISSN: 15383660     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/archfaci.10.5.321     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Zim SA. Microtia reconstruction: an update. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;11(4):275-281.
2. Westin T, Tjellström A, Hammerlid E, Bergström K, Rangert B. Long-term study of quality and safety of osseointegration for the retention of auricular prostheses. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999;121(1):133-143.
3. Rotenberg BW, James AL, Fisher D, Anderson J, Papsin BC. Establishment of a bone-anchored auricular prosthesis (BAAP) program, Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2002;66(3):273-279.
4. Granström G, Bergström K, Odersjö M, Tjellström A. Osseointegrated implants in children: experience from our first 100 patients. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;125(1):85-92.
5. Zeitoun H, De R. Thompson SD, Proops DW. Osseointegrated implants in the management of childhood ear abnormalities: with particular emphasis on complications. J Laryngol Otol. 2002;116(2):87-91.
6. Reisberg DJ, Lipner M. Audiometric evaluation of prosthetic ears: a preliminary report. J Prosthet Dent. 1993;69(2):196-199.
7. Baer T, Moore BC. Effects of spectral smearing on the intelligibility of sentences in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1993;94:1229-1241.
8. Baer T, Moore BC. Effects of spectral smearing on the intelligibility of sentences in the presence of interfering speech. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994;95(4):2277-2280.
9. Boothroyd A, Mulhearn B, Gong J, Ostroff J. Effects of spectral smearing on phoneme and word recognition. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996;100(3):1807-1818.
10. Nejime Y, Moore BC. Simulation of the effect of threshold elevation and loudness recruitment combined with reduced frequency selectivity on the intelligibility of speech in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997;102(1):603-615.
11. Breeuwer M, Plomp R. Speechreading supplemented with auditorily presented speech parameters. J Acoust Soc Am. 1986;79(2):481-499.
12. Breeuwer M, Plomp R. Speechreading supplemented with formant-frequency information from voiced speech. J Acoust Soc Am. 1985;77(1):314-317.
13. Breeuwer M, Plomp R. Speechreading supplemented with frequency-selective sound-pressure information. J Acoust Soc Am. 1984;76(3):686-691.
14. Lippmann RP. Accurate consonant perception without midfrequency speech energy. /EEE Trans Speech Audio Process. 1996;4:66-69.
15. Warren RM, Riener KR, Bashford JA Jr, Brubaker BS. Spectral redundancy: intelligibility of sentences heard through narrow spectral slits. Percept Psychophys. 1995;57(2)175-182.
16. Reinsch CH. Smoothing by spline functions. Numerische Mathematic. 1967;10: 177-183.
17. Litovsky RY, Delgutte B. Neural correlates of the precedence effect in the inferior colliculus: effect of localization cues. J Neurophysiol. 2002;87(2):976-994.
18. Delgutte B, Joris PX, Litovsky RY, Yin TC. Receptive fields and binaural interactions for virtual-space stimuli in the cat inferior colliculus. J Neurophysiol. 1999; 81(6):2833-2851.
19. Teranishi R, Shaw EA. External-ear acoustic models with simple geometry. J Acoust Soc Am. 1968;44(1):257-263.
20. Shaw EA. Transformation of sound pressure level from the free field to the ear-drum in the horizontal plane. J Acoust Soc Am. 1974;56(6):1848-1861.
21. Middlebrooks JC, Dykes RW, Merzenich MM. Binaural response-specific bands in primary auditory cortex (Al) of the cat: topographical organization orthogonal to isofrequency contours. Brain Res. 1980;181(1):31-48.
22. von Békésy G. Experiments in Hearing. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co: 1960.
23. Wiener FM, Ross DA. The pressure distribution in the auditory canal in a progressive sound field. J Acoust Soc Am. 1946;18(2):401-408.
24. Middlebrooks JC, Makous JC, Green DM. Directional sensitivity of sound-pressure levels in the human ear canal. J Acoust Soc Am. 1989:86(1):89-108.
25. Mehrgardt S, Meliert V. Transformation characteristics of the external human ear. J Acoust Soc Am. 1977;61(6):1567-1576.
26. Nilsson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994;95(2):1085-1099.
27. Plomp R, Mimpen AM. Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiology. 1979;18(1):43-52.
28. Laurence RF, Moore BC, Glasberg BR. A comparison of behind-the-ear high-fidelity linear hearing aids and two-channel compression aids, in the laboratory and in everyday life. Br J Audiol. 1983;17(1):31-48.
29. Moore BC, Lynch C, Stone MA. Effects of the fitting parameters of a two-channel compression system on the intelligibility of speech in quiet and in noise. Br J Audiol. 1992;26(6):369-379.