Ear and Hearing (Ear Hear )

Publisher: American Auditory Society, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins

Description

From the basic science of hearing to auditory electrophysiology to amplification and the psychological factors of hearing loss, Ear and Hearing covers all aspects of auditory disorders. This multidisciplinary journal consolidates the various factors that contribute to identification, remediation, and audiologic rehabilitation. It is the one journal that serves the diverse interest of all members of this professional community-- otologigts, educators, and to those involved in the design, manufacture, and distribution of amplification systems. The original articles published in the journal focus on assessment, diagnosis, and management of auditory disorders.

  • Impact factor
    3.26
    Show impact factor history
     
    Impact factor
  • 5-year impact
    3.27
  • Cited half-life
    8.10
  • Immediacy index
    0.67
  • Eigenfactor
    0.01
  • Article influence
    1.26
  • Website
    Ear and Hearing website
  • Other titles
    Ear and hearing
  • ISSN
    0196-0202
  • OCLC
    5731857
  • Material type
    Periodical, Internet resource
  • Document type
    Journal / Magazine / Newspaper, Internet Resource

Publisher details

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins

  • Pre-print
    • Author can archive a pre-print version
  • Post-print
    • Author cannot archive a post-print version
  • Restrictions
    • 12 months embargo
  • Conditions
    • Some journals have separate policies, please check with each journal directly
    • Pre-print must be removed upon acceptance for publication
    • Post-print may be deposited in personal website, university's institutional repository or employers intranet
    • Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
    • Must include statement that it is not the final published version
    • Published source must be acknowledged with full citation
    • Must link to publisher version
    • NIH, Wellcome Trust and HHMI authors will have their accepted manuscripts transmitted to PubMed Central on their behalf (see policy for details)
  • Classification
    ​ yellow

Publications in this journal

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate the sleep architecture and its possible alterations in chronic tinnitus patients, and investigate any possible correlation between sleep architecture modifications and tinnitus perception, adaptation, and the degree of discomfort in these patients. Design: In a prospective, case-control, nonrandomized study, 18 patients affected by chronic tinnitus were compared with a homogeneous control group consisting of 15 healthy subjects. The experimental group was enrolled at the Tinnitus ambulatory at Policlinico Umberto I Department of Sensory Organs, and the control group was composed of voluntary subjects. A full overnight polysomnography was performed on both groups. Tinnitus patients answered two questionnaires: the tinnitus handicap inventory (THI) and a questionnaire concerning their subjective sleep quality, tinnitus intensity before bedtime, tinnitus intensity at remembered nocturnal wake-up periods, and tinnitus intensity at morning wake-up. Controls completed only the sleep quality questionnaire. Results: All tinnitus patients had a statistically significant alteration in sleep stages. Average percentage of stage 1 + stage 2 was 85.4% ± 6.3, whereas, in the control group, the average percentage of stage 1 + stage 2 was 54.9 ± 11.2 (p < 0.001). Stages 3 and 4 and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep was lacking in all tinnitus patients with an average percentage of 6.4 ± 4.9 of REM sleep, and 6.4 ± 4.9 of stages 3 + 4. The control group showed an average percentage of 21.5 ± 3.6 of REM sleep and 21.5 ± 3.6 of stages 3 + 4 (p < 0.001). No correlation was found between the decrease of REM and the increase of the THI score in the tinnitus group (r = 0.04). However, a mild correlation was found between the increase of light sleep (stage 1 + stage 2) and the THI score reported by the tinnitus group. Therefore, patients with light sleep report a higher THI score (r = 0.4). Conclusions: The significant alteration of sleep parameters assessed in tinnitus patients underlines the necessity to consider an adequate therapy that could improve patients’ sleep quality and also opens avenues for further investigations.
    Ear and Hearing 01/2013; 34(4):503-507.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An abstract is unavailable. This article is available as HTML full text and PDF.
    Ear and Hearing 01/2011; 32(1):1.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An abstract is unavailable. This article is available as HTML full text and PDF.
    Ear and Hearing 01/2009; 30(1):147-148.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine the evidence for a cochlear, retrocochlear, or central site of lesion for deafness in two cochlear implant recipients with Kearns-Sayre Syndrome (KSS). Speech perception data and electrically evoked Auditory Brainstem (eABR) and Middle Latency Responses were obtained in two patients with KSS and compared with a group of non-KSS implant recipients. Speech perception data and electrophysiological responses for the patients with KSS were similar to those obtained in non-KSS patients. Results are consistent with an initial cochlear site of lesion for deafness in KSS, and with relative sparing of the central auditory pathway early in the disease.
    Ear and Hearing 07/2008; 29(3):472-5.
  • Ear and Hearing 07/2008; 29(3):476-7.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this investigation was to compare speech recognition and localization performance of subjects who wear bilateral cochlear implants (CICI) with subjects who wear a unilateral cochlear implant (true CI-only). A total of 73 subjects participated in this study. Specifically, of the 73 subjects, 64 (32 CICI and 32 true CI-only) participated in the word recognition testing; 66 (33 CICI and 33 true CI-only) participated in the sentence recognition testing; and 24 (12 CICI and 12 true CI-only) participated in the localization testing. Because of time constraints not all subjects completed all testing. The average age at implantation for the CICI and true CI-only listeners who participated in the speech perception testing was 54 and 55 yrs, respectively, and the average duration of deafness was 8 yrs for both groups of listeners. The average age at implantation for the CICI and true CI-only listeners who participated in the localization testing was 54 and 53 yrs, respectively, and the average duration of deafness was 10 yrs for the CICI listeners and 11 yrs for the true CI-only listeners. All speech stimuli were presented from the front. The test setup for everyday-sound localization comprised an eight-speaker array spanning, an arc of approximately 108 degrees in the frontal horizontal plane. Average group results were transformed to Rationalized Arcsine Unit scores. A comparison in performance between the CICI score and the true CI-only score in quiet revealed a significant difference between the two groups with the CICI group scoring 19% higher for sentences and 24% higher for words. In addition, when both cochlear implants were used together (CICI) rather than when either cochlear implant was used alone (right CI or left CI) for the CICI listeners, results indicated a significant binaural summation effect for sentences and words. The average group results in this study showed significantly greater benefit on words and sentences in quiet and localization for listeners using two cochlear implants over those using only one cochlear implant. One explanation of this result might be that the same information from both sides are combined, which results in a better representation of the stimulus. A second explanation might be that CICI allow for the transfer of different neural information from two damaged peripheral auditory systems leading to different patterns of information summating centrally resulting in enhanced speech perception. A future study using similar methodology to the current one will have to be conducted to determine if listeners with two cochlear implants are able to perform better than listeners with one cochlear implant in noise.
    Ear and Hearing 07/2008; 29(3):352-9.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To compare results for the original version of the threshold equalizing noise [TEN(HL)] test for diagnosis of dead regions (DRs) in the cochlea, using stimuli presented via headphones, with results for an aided version of the test, the ATEN test, in which subjects listened to stimuli presented in free field using their own hearing aids. The test tones were warble tones for both the TEN(HL) and the ATEN test. Twenty-five subjects (12 males and 13 females), aged between 12 and 19 yr, with severe or profound sensorineural hearing loss were tested. For each test, two levels of the TEN were used, chosen to fall within the comfortable range of levels for the individual subject. A DR was considered to be present when the TEN(HL) produced at least 10 dB of masking and when the masked threshold was at least 10 dB above the nominal TEN(HL) level. Measurements of the outputs of the hearing aids in response to the TEN(HL) plus the test tones were obtained using a KEMAR acoustic manikin to assess the extent to which distortion or compression might have influenced the outcomes. For the TEN(HL) test, the results were often inconclusive, because the TEN(HL) could not be made sufficiently intense to give at least 10 dB of masking. The incidence of these inconclusive cases was markedly reduced for the ATEN test. There were more positive diagnoses of DRs for the ATEN test than for the TEN(HL) test. The KEMAR measurements indicated that distortion, compression, and/or feedback cancellation probably influenced the outcomes in some cases, leading to a moderate incidence of false positives for the ATEN test, and also some "missed" cases. The ATEN test leads to a lower incidence of inconclusive results than the TEN(HL) test in the diagnosis of DRs in people with severe to profound hearing loss. However, for some hearing aids the gain changed rapidly as a function of frequency, which undermined the validity of the ATEN test. Also, some hearing aids introduced distortion that probably affected the outcome of the test and gave misleading results. Hence, the ATEN test cannot be recommended for use in the clinic.
    Ear and Hearing 07/2008; 29(3):392-400.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A Canadian French version of the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) has been developed to assess children's ability to recognize speech in noise. To avoid testing a large number of children in each clinical test site to establish soundfield norms, a protocol based on the use of correction factors has been proposed and validated in the current study. More specifically, the objective of this study was to provide a protocol for the establishment of age-specific normative data for the Canadian French HINT for children to facilitate its clinical use and allow comparing an individual child's performance with that of age-matched normal hearing children. Using the proposed protocol, a limited number of normal hearing adults are tested in each HINT condition to correct the adult headphone norms for the soundfield in question, and the correction factors established in the current study are then applied to generate age-specific soundfield norms. Mean adult performance values obtained in a given soundfield are entered into the HINT software, which automatically derives the soundfield adult norms, age-specific children norms, and percentile rankings. Speech reception thresholds (SRT) for sentences were measured in 70 native French-speaking subjects to establish mean performances across various age groups, and correction factors were calculated by comparing performance in each age group with adult performance. To validate the normalization protocol, 28 additional subjects were tested in a new soundfield. The correction factors were applied to adult performance (N = 15) and the resulting predicted scores were compared with measured performance in a group of 9-yr olds (N = 13). Statistical analyses indicate that SRTs decrease with age and reach adult values in older children (12-yr olds). Correction factors are therefore provided for children 6 to 12 yrs old. Spatial separation advantage, the improvement in SRT when speech and noise are spatially separated, also improves with age. The correction factors were effective in predicting mean SRTs for a previously untested age group in all HINT conditions apart from the quiet condition. The difference between predicted and measured performances was less than 0.5 dB for the noise conditions but exceeded 4 dB in the quiet condition. The reliability of SRT measures was determined, with an overall within-subjects SD of repeated measurements of 0.7 dB for the noise front condition. No learning effect was found in the current data. Correction factors can be used to predict performance on the HINT in a group of normal-hearing children in all HINT conditions, apart from quiet. Findings of the current study concur with the literature on age effects in auditory processing abilities, where performance on a variety of auditory tasks has been demonstrated to increase with age to reach adult-like values in adolescence or past 10 yrs.
    Ear and Hearing 07/2008; 29(3):453-66.
  • Ear and Hearing 07/2008; 29(3):477-8.

Related Journals