| |
摘要为了研究不同抑制准则值对刺激频率耳声发射抑制调谐曲线(stimulus frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning curves, SFOAE STCs)调谐特性的影响,该文测试了10名听力正常受试者在1、 2、 4kHz中心频率下,不同抑制准则值的SFOAE STCs, 并提取其特征参数: 调谐曲线品质因数(Q10)、 10dB带宽(BW10)、 顶点纵坐标偏移量等,运用统计学方差分析(analysis of variance, ANOVA)的方法进行抑制准则值对SFOAE STCs的特征参数的显著性水平分析。结果表明: 抑制准则值对SFOAE STCs调谐特性无显著影响,但是,随着抑制准则值的增大, SFOAE STCs更为尖锐,即其调谐特性更为敏锐。
|
| 关键词 ：抑制准则值,调谐特性,品质因数(Q10),10dB带宽(BW10),刺激频率耳声发射抑制调谐曲线(SFOAE STCs) |
Abstract：The effect of the suppression criterion on the tuning characteristic of stimulus frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning curves (SFOAE STCs) was studied for various suppression criteria of 1, 2, 4 kHz center frequencies with 10 normal hearing subjects. Characteristic parameters, such as quality factor (Q10)、10 dB bandwidth (BW10) and the level of tip, were extracted to evaluate the effect of the suppression criterion on the characteristic parameters using the analysis of variance (ANOVA). The significance of the characteristic parameters of the SFOAE STCs for the different suppression criteria with the 10 subjects shows that the suppression criteria have no significant effect on the SFOAE STCs tuning characteristic. However, the SFOAE STCs are more sharply tuned with larger suppression criteria.
|
| Key words：suppression criteriontuning characteristicquality factor (Q10)10 dB bandwidth (BW10)stimulus frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning curves (SFOAE STCs) |
| 收稿日期: 2013-12-30 出版日期: 2015-05-15 |
| 基金资助:国家自然科学基金资助项目(61271133);教育部博导基金资助项目(20120002110054);深圳科学研究发展基金资助项目(JCYJ20140827160046745);清华信息科学与技术国家实验室(筹)学科交叉基金资助项目(042003109) |
 |
| SFOAE STCs检测的实验流程图 |
 |
| SFOAE STCs记录的系统框图 |
 |
| 受试者1在不同抑制准则值时的SFOAE STCs |
 |
| 在不同抑制准则值时所有受试者SFOAE STCs的Q10的平均值的变化趋势图 |
 | 受试者 | 抑制准则值 / dB | | -3 | -6 | -10.6 | | 1 | 2.9074 | 3.0755 | 3.2945 | | 2 | 2.5245 | 2.5056 | 3.0780 | | 3 | 2.8519 | 3.5489 | 3.7652 | | 4 | 3.2010 | 3.3395 | 3.9944 | | 5 | 2.1283 | 2.3239 | 2.7113 | | 6 | 3.6139 | 5.0769 | 3.7133 | | 7 | 4.8187 | 4.2286 | 4.8355 | | 8 | 2.7664 | 3.6580 | 4.8797 | | 9 | 2.6150 | 2.8071 | 3.0402 | | 10 | 2.7302 | 3.0546 | 3.6461 |
|
| 中心频率为1kHz时在不同抑制准则值时所有受试者SFOAE STCs的Q10值 |
| 受试者 | 抑制准则值/dB | | -3 | -6 | -10.6 | | 1 | 5.4073 | 5.1235 | 6.1823 | | 2 | 3.7196 | 4.4412 | 4.5568 | | 3 | 2.4203 | 2.5892 | 1.9333 | | 4 | 2.9016 | 3.8866 | 4.0412 | | 5 | 3.0664 | 4.1603 | 3.4476 | | 6 | 2.7738 | 4.3679 | 5.7279 | | 7 | 3.6329 | 4.5488 | 3.8779 | | 8 | 2.9915 | 3.0107 | 3.5206 | | 9 | 2.6025 | 2.9462 | 4.2763 | | 10 | 6.1182 | 6.3084 | 5.2676 |
|
| 中心频率为2kHz时在不同抑制准则值时所有受试者SFOAE STCs的Q10值 |
| 受试者 | 抑制准则值 / dB | | -3 | -6 | -10.6 | | 1 | 3.4869 | 4.2256 | 4.6828 | | 2 | 4.9225 | 5.2744 | 5.0175 | | 3 | 4.1776 | 4.2666 | 4.1865 | | 4 | 5.4881 | 4.8581 | 4.5219 | | 5 | 5.7544 | 4.2249 | 6.0226 | | 6 | 4.8005 | 4.6819 | 5.4292 | | 7 | 3.6492 | 5.2477 | 6.5084 | | 8 | 3.8705 | 3.6510 | 5.2091 | | 9 | 4.7854 | 5.3943 | 6.2729 | | 10 | 5.6114 | 5.2855 | 5.0176 |
|
| 中心频率为4kHz时在不同抑制准则值时所有受试者SFOAE STCs的Q10值 |
 |
| 在不同抑制准则值时所有受试者SFOAE STCs的BW10的平均值的变化趋势图 |
 |
| 在不同抑制准则值时SFOAE STCs的顶点纵坐标的均值与标准差的变化 |
| [1] | 韩东一, 翟所强, 韩维举. 临床听力学 [M]. 北京: 中国协和医科大学出版社, 2008. HAN Dongyi, ZHAI Suoqiang, HAN Weiju. Clinical Audiology [M]. Beijing: Peking Union Medical College Press, 2008.(in Chinese) |
| [2] | Harris F P, Glattke T J. The use of suppression to determine the characteristics of otoacoustic emissions[J]. Seminars in Hearing, 1992, 13(01): 67-79. |
| [3] | Oxenham A J, Shera C A. Estimates of human cochlear tuning at low levels using forward and simultaneous masking[J]. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 2003, 4(4): 541-554. |
| [4] | Kemp D T, Chum R A. Observations on the generator mechanism of stimulus frequency acoustic emissions—Two tone suppression[J]. Psychophysical, Physiological and Behavioral Studies in Hearing, 1980, 5: 34-42. |
| [5] | Siegel J H, Temchin A N, Ruggero M A. Empirical estimates of the spatial origin of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions[J]. Abstracts of the 26th Annual Midwinter Research Meeting of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 2003, 26: 679. |
| [6] | Temchin A N, Rich N C, Ruggero M A. Threshold tuning curves of chinchilla auditory-nerve fibers. I. Dependence on characteristic frequency and relation to the magnitudes of cochlear vibrations[J]. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2008, 100(5): 2889-2898. |
| [7] | Keefe D H, Ellison J C, Fitzpatrick D F, et al.Two-tone suppression of stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions[J]. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2008, 123(3): 1479-1494. |
| [8] | Cheatham M A, Katz E D, Charaziak K, et al.Using stimulus frequency emissions to characterize cochlear function in mice[J]. Proceedings of the 11th International Mechanics of Hearing Workshop, 2011, 1403(1): 383-388. |
| [9] | Charaziak K K, Souza P, Siegel J H. Stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emission suppression tuning in humans: Comparison to behavioral tuning[J]. Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology, 2013, 14(6): 843-862. |
| [10] | Brass D, Kemp D T. Time-domain observation of otoacoustic emissions during constant tone stimulation[J]. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1991, 90(5): 2415-2427. |
| [11] | Keefe D H, Ellison J C, Fitzpatrick D F, et al.Two-tone suppression of stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions[J]. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2008, 123(3): 1479-1494. |
)
