Suppr超能文献

用于评估耳鸣响度的脉冲音与持续音

Pulsed versus continuous tones for evaluating the loudness of tinnitus.

作者信息

Henry J A, Meikle M B

机构信息

National VA RR&D Center for Rehabilitative Auditory Research, Portland VA Medical Center, Oregon 97207, USA.

出版信息

J Am Acad Audiol. 1999 May;10(5):261-72.

Abstract

Loudness balance techniques are commonly employed to match the loudness of tinnitus using either pulsed or continuous tones; however, it is not known whether the tone duration affects the observed loudness matches. In this study, hearing thresholds and tinnitus loudness matches were measured in 26 subjects with chronic tinnitus using both pulsed and continuous tones. Subjects' thresholds and loudness matches were determined at 11 frequencies between 0.5 and 10 kHz. No significant differences were found between pulsed versus continuous measures, either for thresholds or for loudness matches. There were, however, nine subjects (34.5% of the group) who showed relatively large differences (> or =10 dB) at one or more test frequencies. These "outlier" values did not show systematic trends; some were positive, some negative. In conclusion, studies employing group data appear to be comparable if group sizes are sufficiently large (e.g., > or =25 subjects). Studies employing smaller numbers of subjects may, however, be vulnerable to potential positive or negative biases introduced by one or more outliers.

摘要

响度平衡技术通常用于通过脉冲音或连续音来匹配耳鸣的响度;然而,尚不清楚音持续时间是否会影响观察到的响度匹配。在本研究中,使用脉冲音和连续音对26名慢性耳鸣患者的听力阈值和耳鸣响度匹配进行了测量。在0.5至10 kHz之间的11个频率上确定了受试者的阈值和响度匹配。无论是阈值还是响度匹配,脉冲测量与连续测量之间均未发现显著差异。然而,有9名受试者(占该组的34.5%)在一个或多个测试频率上表现出相对较大的差异(≥10 dB)。这些“异常值”未显示出系统趋势;有些是正值,有些是负值。总之,如果样本量足够大(例如≥25名受试者),采用组数据的研究似乎具有可比性。然而,采用较少受试者数量的研究可能容易受到一个或多个异常值引入的潜在正偏差或负偏差的影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验