商场听力:多波束处理技术改善了现实世界美食广场环境中的群体对话听力。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
American Journal of Audiology Pub Date : 2024-09-03 Epub Date: 2024-07-10 DOI:10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00027
Paula Folkeard, Niels Søgaard Jensen, Homayoun Kamkar Parsi, Sascha Bilert, Susan Scollie
{"title":"商场听力:多波束处理技术改善了现实世界美食广场环境中的群体对话听力。","authors":"Paula Folkeard, Niels Søgaard Jensen, Homayoun Kamkar Parsi, Sascha Bilert, Susan Scollie","doi":"10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate conversation hearing with an adaptive beamforming hearing aid that supports adaptive tracking of multiple talkers in an ecologically valid, real-world food court environment in a busy mall.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Twenty older adult experienced hearing aid wearers with sensorineural hearing loss were fitted in the lab with binaural receiver-in-the-canal style hearing aids set with two programs, each having a different beamforming strategy. The participant and two researchers then met in a moderately noisy and reverberant food court at a local mall where the participant was asked to listen to a conversation between the two researchers. Participants rated the extent of their agreement with 10 positively worded statements specific to the conversation twice, once for each program. Participants then provided program-preference ratings for seven different aspects of a conversation during which the programs were switched back and forth by the researcher, so that participants were unaware of the condition to which they were listening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Real-world subjective ratings for all domains resulted in positive values on average for both programs. Pairwise comparisons indicated that the intervention algorithm had higher absolute ratings on five of the 10 criteria including understanding, clarity, focus, listening effort, and background noise. Ratings for preference between programs indicated a significant preference for the intervention algorithm for all seven criteria.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a real-world setting, the use of hearing aids with separate processing of sounds from the front and back hemisphere provided positive subjective ratings. However, following a group conversation with multiple conversation partners, improvements in the algorithm to account for the locations of interlocutors and the natural head turning of the hearing aid wearer that occurs during a conversation by adding and controlling multiple adaptive beams in the front hemisphere significantly influenced preference for all aspects rated.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"782-792"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hearing at the Mall: Multibeam Processing Technology Improves Hearing Group Conversations in a Real-World Food Court Environment.\",\"authors\":\"Paula Folkeard, Niels Søgaard Jensen, Homayoun Kamkar Parsi, Sascha Bilert, Susan Scollie\",\"doi\":\"10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate conversation hearing with an adaptive beamforming hearing aid that supports adaptive tracking of multiple talkers in an ecologically valid, real-world food court environment in a busy mall.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Twenty older adult experienced hearing aid wearers with sensorineural hearing loss were fitted in the lab with binaural receiver-in-the-canal style hearing aids set with two programs, each having a different beamforming strategy. The participant and two researchers then met in a moderately noisy and reverberant food court at a local mall where the participant was asked to listen to a conversation between the two researchers. Participants rated the extent of their agreement with 10 positively worded statements specific to the conversation twice, once for each program. Participants then provided program-preference ratings for seven different aspects of a conversation during which the programs were switched back and forth by the researcher, so that participants were unaware of the condition to which they were listening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Real-world subjective ratings for all domains resulted in positive values on average for both programs. Pairwise comparisons indicated that the intervention algorithm had higher absolute ratings on five of the 10 criteria including understanding, clarity, focus, listening effort, and background noise. Ratings for preference between programs indicated a significant preference for the intervention algorithm for all seven criteria.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a real-world setting, the use of hearing aids with separate processing of sounds from the front and back hemisphere provided positive subjective ratings. However, following a group conversation with multiple conversation partners, improvements in the algorithm to account for the locations of interlocutors and the natural head turning of the hearing aid wearer that occurs during a conversation by adding and controlling multiple adaptive beams in the front hemisphere significantly influenced preference for all aspects rated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49241,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Audiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"782-792\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Audiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00027\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Audiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_AJA-24-00027","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在评估自适应波束成形助听器的对话听力,该助听器支持在繁忙商场的美食广场环境中自适应跟踪多个谈话者:20 名有经验的老年感音神经性听力损失助听器佩戴者在实验室安装了双耳耳道式助听器,助听器有两个程序,每个程序都有不同的波束成形策略。然后,受试者和两名研究人员在当地一家商场的一个噪音和混响适中的美食广场会面,受试者被要求聆听两名研究人员之间的对话。受试者对对话中 10 个正面措辞的陈述的同意程度进行两次评分,每个节目一次。然后,参与者对对话的七个不同方面进行节目偏好评分,在此期间,研究人员会来回切换节目,这样参与者就不会意识到他们正在收听的是哪一个节目:所有领域的真实世界主观评分结果显示,两个节目的平均评分值均为正值。配对比较表明,在 10 项标准中,干预算法在理解、清晰度、重点、聆听强度和背景噪音等 5 项标准上的绝对评分更高。程序之间的偏好评分表明,在所有七项标准中,干预算法的偏好度都很高:在实际环境中,使用前后半球分别处理声音的助听器可获得积极的主观评价。然而,在与多个对话伙伴进行小组对话后,通过增加和控制前半球的多个自适应波束来考虑对话者的位置和助听器佩戴者在对话过程中自然转头的情况,这种算法的改进极大地影响了对所有评分标准的偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hearing at the Mall: Multibeam Processing Technology Improves Hearing Group Conversations in a Real-World Food Court Environment.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate conversation hearing with an adaptive beamforming hearing aid that supports adaptive tracking of multiple talkers in an ecologically valid, real-world food court environment in a busy mall.

Method: Twenty older adult experienced hearing aid wearers with sensorineural hearing loss were fitted in the lab with binaural receiver-in-the-canal style hearing aids set with two programs, each having a different beamforming strategy. The participant and two researchers then met in a moderately noisy and reverberant food court at a local mall where the participant was asked to listen to a conversation between the two researchers. Participants rated the extent of their agreement with 10 positively worded statements specific to the conversation twice, once for each program. Participants then provided program-preference ratings for seven different aspects of a conversation during which the programs were switched back and forth by the researcher, so that participants were unaware of the condition to which they were listening.

Results: Real-world subjective ratings for all domains resulted in positive values on average for both programs. Pairwise comparisons indicated that the intervention algorithm had higher absolute ratings on five of the 10 criteria including understanding, clarity, focus, listening effort, and background noise. Ratings for preference between programs indicated a significant preference for the intervention algorithm for all seven criteria.

Conclusions: In a real-world setting, the use of hearing aids with separate processing of sounds from the front and back hemisphere provided positive subjective ratings. However, following a group conversation with multiple conversation partners, improvements in the algorithm to account for the locations of interlocutors and the natural head turning of the hearing aid wearer that occurs during a conversation by adding and controlling multiple adaptive beams in the front hemisphere significantly influenced preference for all aspects rated.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Audiology
American Journal of Audiology AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
163
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Mission: AJA publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to clinical audiology methods and issues, and serves as an outlet for discussion of related professional and educational issues and ideas. The journal is an international outlet for research on clinical research pertaining to screening, diagnosis, management and outcomes of hearing and balance disorders as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. The clinical orientation of the journal allows for the publication of reports on audiology as implemented nationally and internationally, including novel clinical procedures, approaches, and cases. AJA seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work. Scope: The broad field of clinical audiology, including audiologic/aural rehabilitation; balance and balance disorders; cultural and linguistic diversity; detection, diagnosis, prevention, habilitation, rehabilitation, and monitoring of hearing loss; hearing aids, cochlear implants, and hearing-assistive technology; hearing disorders; lifespan perspectives on auditory function; speech perception; and tinnitus.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信