Breakdown of primary frequencies used in pediatric hearing screening with distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs)

References

• Hall IIJ, Baer JE, Chase PA, et al. Clinical application of otoacoustic emissions: what do we know about factors influencing measurement and analysis? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1994;110(1):22–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemp DT. Otoacoustic emissions, their origin in cochlear function, and use. Br Med Bull. 2002;63(1):223–241.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Janssen T, Niedermeyer HP, Arnold W. Diagnostics of the cochlear amplifier by means of distortion product otoacoustic emissions. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2006;68(6):334–339.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shera CA, Guinan JJ., Jr. Evoked otoacoustic emissions arise by two fundamentally different mechanisms: a taxonomy for mammalian OAEs. J Acoust Soc Am. 1999;105(2 Pt 1):782–798.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hauser R, Probst R. The influence of systematic primary-tone level variation L2-L1 on the acoustic distortion product emission 2f1-f2 in normal human ears . J Acoust Soc Am. 1991;89(1):280–286.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kummer P, Janssen T, Hulin P, et al. Optimal L1− L2 primary tone level separation remains independent of test frequency in humans. Hear Res. 2000;146(1–2):47–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brownell WE. Outer hair cell electromotility and otoacoustic emissions. Ear Hear. 1990;11(2):82–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Withnell RH, Yates GK. Onset of basilar membrane non-linearity reflected in cubic distortion tone input-output functions. Hear Res. 1998;123(1-2):87–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK, Telischi FF. Otoacoustic emissions in clinical practice. In: Musiek FE, Rintelmann WF, etitors. Contemporary Perspectives in Hearing Assessment. 3rd ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 1999. p. 167–196.
   Google Scholar
• Petersen L, Wilson WJ, Kathard H. A systematic review of stimulus parameters for eliciting distortion product otoacoustic emissions from adult humans. Int J Audiol. 2017;56(6):382–391.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin GK, Ohlms LA, Harris FP, et al. Distortion product emissions in humans: III. Influence of sensorineural hearing loss. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1990;99(5_suppl):30–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorga MP, Stover L, Neely ST, et al. The use of cumulative distributions to determine critical values and levels of confidence for clinical distortion product otoacoustic emission measurements. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996;100(2 Pt 1):968–977.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorga MP, Neely ST, Dorn PA, et al. The use of distortion product otoacoustic emission suppression as an estimate of response growth. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002;111(1):271–284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neely ST, Johnson TA, Kopun J, et al. Distortion-product otoacoustic emission input/output characteristics in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired human ears. J Acoust Soc Am. 2009;126(2):728–738.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakhos D, Marx M, Villeneuve A, et al. Electrophysiological exploration of hearing. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2017;134(5):325–331.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poling GL, Vlosich B, Dreisbach LE. Emerging distortion product otoacoustic emission techniques to identify preclinical warning signs of basal cochlear dysfunction due to ototoxicity. Appl Sci. 2019;9(15):3132.
   Google Scholar
• Stover L, Gorga MP, Neely ST, et al. Toward optimizing the clinical utility of distortion product otoacoustic emission measurements. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996;100(2 Pt 1):956–967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner W, Plinkert PK. The relationship between auditory threshold and evoked otoacoustic emissions. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 1999;256(4):177–188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konrad-Martin D, Poling GL, Dreisbach LE, et al. Serial monitoring of otoacoustic emissions in clinical trials. Otol Neurotol. 2016;37(8):e286–e294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moepeng M. Applicability of distortion product otoacoustic emissions as a new health surveillance technique for hearing screening in industry [Doctoral dissertation]. Pretoria: University of Pretoria; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Asal S, Sobhy O, Ismail O, et al. Study of the effect of combined interferon and ribavirin therapy on the hearing profile of hepatitis C virus patients. Egypt J Otolaryngol. 2015;31(4):237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dong W, Stomackin G, Lin X, et al. Distortion product otoacoustic emissions: sensitive measures of tympanic-membrane perforation and healing processes in a gerbil model. Hear Res. 2019;378:3–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faranesh N, Magamseh E, Zaaroura S, et al. Hearing and otoacoustic emissions outcome of stapedotomy: does the prosthesis diameter matter? Int Adv Otol. 2017;13(2):162–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdala C. Distortion product otoacoustic emission (2f1-f2) amplitude growth in human adults and neonates. J Acoust Soc Am. 2000;107(1):446–456.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zelle D, Dalhoff E, Gummer AW. Objective audiometry with DPOAEs: new findings for generation mechanisms and clinical applications. HNO. 2017;65(Suppl 2):122–129.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Braun K, Zelle D, Braun LH, et al. Evaluation of the cochlear amplifier using time-efficient acquisition of short-pulse DPOAE levels maps. Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie. 2019;98(S 02):11551.
   Google Scholar
• Vencovský V, Vetešník A. Analysis of level dependence of 2f 1–f 2 component of otoacoustic emissions using nonlinear 2D cochlear model. Acta Acustica United Acustica. 2018;104(5):891–894.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verhulst S, Jagadeesh A, Mauermann M, et al. Relations between auditory brainstem response and threshold metrics in normal and impaired hearing listeners. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research; 2015 Dec 15; Nyborg, Denmark. 2015. Vol. 5; pp. 35–42.
   Google Scholar
• Wiederhold ML, Mahoney JW, Kellogg DL. Acoustic overstimulation reduces 2f 1-f 2 cochlear emissions at all levels in the cat. In: Allen JB, Hall JL, Hubbard AE, Neely ST, Tubis A, editors. Peripheral auditory mechanisms. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 1986.p. 322–329.
   Google Scholar
• Whitehead ML, Lonsbury-Martin BL, Martin GK. Actively and passively generated acoustic distortion at 2f 1-f 2 in rabbits. In: Dallos P, Geisler CD, Matthews JW, Ruggero MA, Steele CR, editors. The mechanics and biophysics of hearing. New York, NY: Springer; 1990. p. 243–250.
   Google Scholar
• Frolenkov GI, Belyantseva IA, Kurc M, et al. Cochlear outer hair cell electromotility can provide force for both low and high intensity distortion product otoacoustic emissions. Hear Res. 1998;126(1–2):67–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mom T, Bonfils P, Gilain L, et al. Origin of cubic difference tones generated by high-intensity stimuli: effect of ischemia and auditory fatigue on the gerbil cochlea. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001;110(3 Pt 1):1477–1488.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baiduc RR, Dhar S. Exploring optimal stimulus frequency ratio for measurement of the quadratic f2-f1 distortion product otoacoustic emission in humans. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018;61(7):1794–1806.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitehead ML, Lonsbury‐Martin BL, Martin GK. Evidence for two discrete sources of 2f1-f2 distortion-product otoacoustic emission in rabbit: I. Differential dependence on stimulus parameters. J Acoust Soc Am. 1992;91(3):1587–1607.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Fallah E, Olson ES. Adaptation of cochlear amplification to low endocochlear potential. Biophys J. 2019;116(9):1769–1786.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills DM. Interpretation of distortion product otoacoustic emission measurements. I. Two stimulus tones. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997;102(1):413–429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vencovský V, Vetešník A, Dalhoff E, et al. Distributed sources as a cause of abrupt amplitude decrease in cubic distortion-product otoacoustic emissions at high stimulus intensities. J Acoust Soc Am. 2019;146(2):EL92–EL98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar