1978
DOI: 10.1001/archotol.1978.00790070031008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of Age on Prediction of Sensorineural Hearing Level From the Acoustic Reflex

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
26
1

Year Published

1981
1981
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
5
26
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This divergence is consistent with previous reports that showed differences ranging from 8 to 11 dB for temporal integration at 1000 ms ͑Handler and Margolis, 1977;Silman, 1979a, b;Gelfand and Piper, 1981;Wilson, 1981͒. It has been suggested that the difference in the ART for the BBN activator at 1000 ms is related to the slight differences in hearing sensitivity between younger adults with normal-hearing sensitivity and older adults with normal-hearing sensitivity ͑Jerger et al., 1978a. It was therefore assumed that temporal integration for older and younger adults is similar, and any observed differences are related to slight differences in hearing sensitivity rather than age.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…This divergence is consistent with previous reports that showed differences ranging from 8 to 11 dB for temporal integration at 1000 ms ͑Handler and Margolis, 1977;Silman, 1979a, b;Gelfand and Piper, 1981;Wilson, 1981͒. It has been suggested that the difference in the ART for the BBN activator at 1000 ms is related to the slight differences in hearing sensitivity between younger adults with normal-hearing sensitivity and older adults with normal-hearing sensitivity ͑Jerger et al., 1978a. It was therefore assumed that temporal integration for older and younger adults is similar, and any observed differences are related to slight differences in hearing sensitivity rather than age.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…They suggested that the difference in dB between the two reflex thresholds was an indicator of loudness recruitment in ears with presumed sensorineural hearing losses. Following this research, Jerger et al (1974Jerger et al ( , 1978 developed the Sensitivity Prediction with the Acoustic Reflex (SPAR) test in an attempt to determine hearing sensitivity from normal to profound hearing loss. The classification of hearing sensitivity was based on AR thresholds obtained using BBN and pure tones of 0.5, 1, and 2 kHz, and the difference in thresholds between the BBN and pure-tone activators.…”
Section: Sumariomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The classification of hearing sensitivity was based on AR thresholds obtained using BBN and pure tones of 0.5, 1, and 2 kHz, and the difference in thresholds between the BBN and pure-tone activators. Using a modified version of the SPAR test, Jerger et al (1978) were more successful in predicting hearing sensitivity in children (under 10 years of age) than in adults. In young children, acoustic reflex prediction methods clearly offer a rapid, objective measure of hearing sensitivity.…”
Section: Sumariomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1), age, and duration and etiology of the hearing disorder, the three groups produced masking patterns which did not differ significantly. Factors such as age and audiogram contour are known to affect the outcome of other physiological and behavioral tests of auditory function such as the auditory brain stem response (Seitz et al, 1980;Jerger and Hall, 1980;Coats and Martin, 1977;Stockard et al, 1979), acoustic stapedial reflexes (Jerger et al, 1978;Gelfand and Piper, 1981;Hall, 1982a,b), and performance on the Synthetic Sentence Identification (SSI) test (Jerger and Hayes, 1977;Hayes, 1981). Why, then, should these factors play so minor a role in the outcome of the present experiment?…”
Section: Susceptibility To Masking Among Hearing-impaired Groupsmentioning
confidence: 99%