Loudness and auditory steady-state responses in normal-hearing subjects

References

• Barajas J.J., Fernández R., Bernal M.R. Middle latency and 40 Hz auditory evoked responses in normal hearing children: 500 Hz thresholds. Scand Audiol Suppl 1988; 30: 99–104
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barajas, J.J. & Zenker, F. 2002. Auditory steady state responses. Auditio: Revista electrónica de audiología [online]. 1(2), [Accessed 9th October 2007], pp. 20–24. Available from: http://www.auditio.com/revista/pdf/vol1/2/010202.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Barajas J.J., Zenker F. Auditory evoked potentials. Treatise on Audiology, E. Salesa, E. Perelló, A. Bonavida. Masson S.A, Barcelona 2005; 241–255
   Google Scholar
• Barajas J.J., Zenker F. Auditory evoked potentials. Treatise on Otolaryngology: Head & Neck, Carlos Suárez. Proyectos Médicos, Madrid 2007; 1133–1155
   Google Scholar
• Beattie R.C., Huynh R.C., Ngo V.N., Jones R.L. IHAFF loudness contour test: Reliability and effects of approach mode in normal hearing subjects. J Am Acad Audiol 1997; 8: 243–256
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brand T., Hohmann V. An adaptative procedure for categorical loudness scaling. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 112(4)1597–604
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne D., Dillon H., Ching T., Katsch R., Keidser G. NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: Characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. J Am Acad Audiol 2001; 12(1)37–51
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cone-Wesson B., Parker J., Swiderski N., Rickards F. The auditory steady-state response: Full-term and premature neonates. J Am Acad Audiol 2002; 13(5)260–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Conjin E.A.J.G., Brocaar M.P., Van Zanten G.A. Frequency specificity of the auditory brainstem response elicited by 1000 Hz filtered clicks. Audiology 1990; 29: 181–195
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C., Taylor I.M., Gray G.A. The contour test of loudness perception. Ear Hear 1997; 18(5)388–400
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidson S.A., Wall L.G., Goodman C.M. Preliminary studies on the use of an ABR projection procedure for hearing aid selection. Ear Hear 1990; 11(5)332–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimitrijevic A., John M.S., Van Roon P., Purcell D.W., Adamonis J., et al. Estimating the audiogram using multiple auditory steady-state responses. J Am Acad Audiol 2002; 13(4)205–24
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elberling C. Loudness scaling revisited. J Am Acad Audiol 1999; 10(5)248–60
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elberling C., Nielsen C. The dynamics of speech and the auditory dynamic range in sensorineural hearing impairment. Recent Developments in Hearing Instrument Technology. Proceedings of the 15th Danavox Symposium, J. Beilin, G.R. Jensen. Stougard Jensen, Copenhagen 1993; 99–133
   Google Scholar
• Fabry D.A., Schum D.J. The role of subjective measurement techniques in hearing aid fittings. Strategies for Selecting and Verifying Hearing Aid Fittings, M. Valente. Thieme Medical Publishers, New York 1994; 136–155
   Google Scholar
• Galambos R., Hecox K. Clinical applications of the auditory brainstem response. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1978; 11: 709–722
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenhouse S.W., Geisser S. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 1959; 24: 95–112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall J.W. III. Classic site-of-lesion test: Foundation of diagnostic audiology. Hearing Assessment, W.F. Rintelmann. Pro-ed, AustinUSA 1991; 653–678
   Google Scholar
• Herdman A.T., Stapells D.R. Thresholds determined using the monotic and dichotic multiple auditory steady-state response technique in normal-hearing subjects. Scand Audiol 2001; 30(1)41–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hohman V., Kollmeier B. Further development and use of hearing field scaling in clinics. Audiol Acoust 1995; 34: 48–60
   Google Scholar
• Jenstad L.M., Cornelisse L.E., Seewald R.C. Effects of test procedure on individual loudness functions. Ear Hear 1997; 18(5)401–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John M.S., Lins O.G., Boucher B.L., Picton T.W. Multiple auditory steady-state responses (MASTER): Stimulus and recording parameters. Audiology 1998; 37(2)59–82
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kiessling J., Steffens T., Wagner I. On the clinical applicability of loudness scaling. Audiol Acoust 1993; 32: 100–115
   Google Scholar
• Kiessling J. Hearing aid selection by brainstem audiometry. Scand Audiol 1982; 11: 269–275
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuwada S., Batra R., Maher V.L. Scalp potentials of normal and hearing-impaired subjects in response to sinusoidally amplitude-modulated tones. Hear Res 1986; 21(2)179–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenarz T., Gulzow J., Grozinger M., Hoth S. Clinical evaluation of 40-Hz middle-latency responses in adults: Frequency specific threshold estimation and suprathreshold amplitude characteristics. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 1986; 48(1)24–32
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lins O.G., Picton T.W., Boucher B.L., Durieux-Smith A., Champagne S.C., et al. Frequency-specific audiometry using steady-state responses. Ear Hear 1996; 17(2)81–96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martinez Fernandez A., Alanon Fernandez M.A., Ayala Martinez L.F., Alvarez Alvarez A.B., Miranda Leon M.T., et al. Comparative study between auditory steady-state responses, auditory brain-stem responses and laminar tonal audiometry. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 2007; 58(7)290–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Parker D., O'Dwyer D. The 40-Hz modulation-following response: Prediction of low-frequency uncomfortable loudness levels in normally-earing adults. Audiology 1998; 37(6)372–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picton T.W., Dimitrijevic A., Perez-Abalo M.C., Van Roon P. Estimating audiometric thresholds using auditory steady-state responses. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16(3)140–56
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Picton T.W., Skinner C.R., Champagne S.C., Kellett A.J., Maiste A.C. Potentials evoked by the sinusoidal modulation of the amplitude or frequency of a tone. J Acoust Soc Am 1987; 82(1)165–78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picton T.W., van Roon P., John M.S. Human auditory steady-state responses during sweeps of intensity. Ear Hear 2007; 28(4)542–57
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picton T.W., Woods D.L., Baribeau-Braun J., Healey T.M. Evoked potential audiometry. J Otolaryngol 1976; 6(2)90–119
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rance G., Roper R., Symons L., Moody L.J., Poulis C., et al. Hearing threshold estimation in infants using auditory steady-state responses. J Am Acad Audiol 2005; 16(5)291–300
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ricketts T.A., Bentler R.A. The effect of test signal type and bandwith on the categorical scaling of loudness. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 99: 2281–2287
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez R., Picton T., Linden D., Hamel G., Laframboise G. Human auditory steady state responses: Effects of intensity and frequency. Ear Hear 1986; 7(5)300–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenhamer H.J., Lindstrom B., Lundborg T. On the use of click-evoked electric brainstem responses in audiological diagnosis. III. Latencies in cochlear hearing loss. Scandinavian Audiology 1981a; 10(1)3–11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenhamer H.J., Lindstrom B., Lundborg T. On the use of click-evoked electric brainstem responses in audiological diagnosis. IV. Interaural latency differences (wave V) in cochlear hearing loss. Scand Audiol 1981b; 10(2)67–73
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serpanos Y.C., O'Malley H., Gravel J.S. The relationship between loudness intensity functions and the click-ABR wave V latency. Ear Hear 1997; 18(5)409–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornton A.R., Farrell G., McSporran E.L. Clinical methods for the objective estimation of loudness discomfort level (LDL) using auditory brainstem responses in patients. Scand Audiol 1989; 18(4)25–30
   Google Scholar
• Thornton A.R., Yardley L., Farrell G. The objective estimation of loudness discomfort level using auditory brainstem evoked responses. Scand Audiol 1987; 16(4)219–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valdes J.L., Perez-Abalo M.C., Martin V., Savio G., Sierra C., et al. Comparison of statistical indicators for the automatic detection of 80 Hz auditory steady state responses. Ear Hear 1997; 18(5)420–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vander Werff K.R., Brown C.J. Effect of audiometric configuration on threshold and suprathreshold auditory steady-state responses. Ear Hear 2005; 26(3)310–26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zenker F., Barajas J.J. The adjustment of hearing aids from the Long Term Average Speech Spectrum. A single case study. Educational and Clinical Speech Therapy. Last Advances in Evaluation and Intervention, José Domingo Martín Espino. Editorial CEPE, Madrid 1999; 329–336
   Google Scholar
• Zenker, F. 2002. The prescription of gain in hearing aid fitting. Auditio: Revista electrónica de audiología [online]. 1(3), [Accessed 9th October 2007], pp. 20–24. Available from: http://www.auditio.com/revista/pdf/vol1/3/010202.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Zenker, F., Delgado, J. & Barajas, J.J. 2003. Hearing Aid Adjustment by Auditory Steady States Responses Audiometry. Oral session presented at the International Evoked Responses Audiometry Study Group, Tenerife, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Zenker, F., Santos, V., Larumbe, E., Fernández, R. & Barajas, J.J. 2004. Loudness and Auditory Steady State Responses. Oral session presented at the International Congress of Audiology, Phoenix, Arizona, EEUU.
   Google Scholar
• Zenker, F., Fernández, R. & Barajas, J.J. 2005. The Contour Test Electrified. Poster presented at the European Federation of Audiology Societies, Gothenburg, Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Zenker F., Fernández R., Barajas J.J. Fitting hearing aids in early childhood based on auditory evoked potentials in steady states. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp 2006; 57(9)388–93
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zenker, F. & Barajas, J.J. 2008. ASSRs: Their role in hearing device fitting. In: Gary Rance. The Auditory Steady-State Response: Generation, Recording, and Clinical Application, Singular Publishing, In Press.
   Google Scholar