Performance and reliability evaluation of an improved machine learning-based pure-tone audiometry with automated masking.

Q2 Medicine
World Journal of OtorhinolaryngologyHead and Neck Surgery Pub Date : 2024-09-12 eCollection Date: 2025-06-01 DOI:10.1002/wjo2.208
Nicolas Wallaert, Antoine Perry, Sandra Quarino, Hadrien Jean, Gwenaelle Creff, Benoit Godey, Nihaad Paraouty
{"title":"Performance and reliability evaluation of an improved machine learning-based pure-tone audiometry with automated masking.","authors":"Nicolas Wallaert, Antoine Perry, Sandra Quarino, Hadrien Jean, Gwenaelle Creff, Benoit Godey, Nihaad Paraouty","doi":"10.1002/wjo2.208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Automated air-conduction pure-tone audiograms through Bayesian estimation and machine learning (ML) classification have recently been proposed in the literature. Although such ML-based audiometry approaches represent a significant addition to the field, they remain unsuited for daily clinical settings, in particular for listeners with asymmetric or conductive hearing loss, severe hearing loss, or cochlear dead zones. The goal here is to expand on previously proposed ML approaches and assess the performance of this improved ML audiometry for a large sample of listeners with a wide range of hearing status.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>First, we describe the changes made to the ML method through the addition of: (1) safety limits to test listeners with a wide range of hearing status, (2) transient responses to cater for cochlear dead zones or nonmeasurable thresholds, and importantly, (3) automated contralateral masking to test listeners with asymmetric or conductive hearing loss. Next, we compared the performance of this improved ML audiometry with conventional and manual audiometry in a large cohort (<i>n</i> = 109 subjects) of both normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our results showed that for all audiometric frequencies tested, no significant difference was found between hearing thresholds obtained using manual audiometry on a clinical audiometer as compared to both the manual and automated improved ML methods. Furthermore, the test-retest difference was not significant with the automated improved ML method for each audiometric frequency tested. Finally, when examining cross-clinic reliability measures, significant differences were found for most audiometric frequencies tested.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Together, our results validate the use of this improved ML-based method in adult clinical tests for air-conduction audiometry.</p>","PeriodicalId":32097,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of OtorhinolaryngologyHead and Neck Surgery","volume":"11 2","pages":"173-188"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12172120/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of OtorhinolaryngologyHead and Neck Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wjo2.208","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Automated air-conduction pure-tone audiograms through Bayesian estimation and machine learning (ML) classification have recently been proposed in the literature. Although such ML-based audiometry approaches represent a significant addition to the field, they remain unsuited for daily clinical settings, in particular for listeners with asymmetric or conductive hearing loss, severe hearing loss, or cochlear dead zones. The goal here is to expand on previously proposed ML approaches and assess the performance of this improved ML audiometry for a large sample of listeners with a wide range of hearing status.

Methods: First, we describe the changes made to the ML method through the addition of: (1) safety limits to test listeners with a wide range of hearing status, (2) transient responses to cater for cochlear dead zones or nonmeasurable thresholds, and importantly, (3) automated contralateral masking to test listeners with asymmetric or conductive hearing loss. Next, we compared the performance of this improved ML audiometry with conventional and manual audiometry in a large cohort (n = 109 subjects) of both normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.

Results: Our results showed that for all audiometric frequencies tested, no significant difference was found between hearing thresholds obtained using manual audiometry on a clinical audiometer as compared to both the manual and automated improved ML methods. Furthermore, the test-retest difference was not significant with the automated improved ML method for each audiometric frequency tested. Finally, when examining cross-clinic reliability measures, significant differences were found for most audiometric frequencies tested.

Conclusions: Together, our results validate the use of this improved ML-based method in adult clinical tests for air-conduction audiometry.

一种改进的基于机器学习的带有自动掩蔽的纯音测听的性能和可靠性评估。
目的:最近有文献提出了通过贝叶斯估计和机器学习(ML)分类的自动空气传导纯音听力图。尽管这种基于ml的听力测量方法代表了该领域的重要补充,但它们仍然不适合日常临床环境,特别是对于不对称或传导性听力损失,严重听力损失或耳蜗死区的听众。这里的目标是扩展先前提出的ML方法,并评估这种改进的ML测听法在听力状态范围广泛的听众的大样本中的性能。方法:首先,我们描述了ML方法的变化,通过增加:(1)安全限制来测试具有广泛听力状态的听者,(2)瞬态响应以满足耳蜗死区或不可测量阈值,重要的是,(3)自动对侧掩蔽来测试具有不对称或传导性听力损失的听者。接下来,我们在一个包括听力正常和听力受损听众的大型队列(n = 109)中,比较了这种改进的ML听力学与传统听力学和手动听力学的性能。结果:我们的结果表明,对于所有测试的听力频率,与手动和自动改进的ML方法相比,在临床听力计上使用手动听力测量获得的听力阈值之间没有显着差异。此外,自动改进的ML方法对每个测试的听力频率的重测差异不显著。最后,当检查跨诊所的可靠性措施,显著差异发现大多数听力频率测试。结论:总之,我们的结果验证了这种改进的基于ml的方法在成人空气传导听力学临床测试中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
283
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信