Validation of the acoustic change complex (ACC) prediction model to predict speech perception in noise in adult patients with hearing loss: a study protocol.
Acoustic change complex
Biomarker
EEG
Electroencephalography
Evoked potential
Hearing impairment
Hearing loss
Objective measurement
Speech in noise
Speech perception
Journal
Diagnostic and prognostic research
ISSN: 2397-7523
Titre abrégé: Diagn Progn Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101718985
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Jan 2024
23 Jan 2024
Historique:
received:
03
07
2023
accepted:
15
01
2024
medline:
24
1
2024
pubmed:
24
1
2024
entrez:
23
1
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Speech perception tests are essential to measure the functional use of hearing and to determine the effectiveness of hearing aids and implantable auditory devices. However, these language-based tests require active participation and are influenced by linguistic and neurocognitive skills limiting their use in patients with insufficient language proficiency, cognitive impairment, or in children. We recently developed a non-attentive and objective speech perception prediction model: the Acoustic Change Complex (ACC) prediction model. The ACC prediction model uses electroencephalography to measure alterations in cortical auditory activity caused by frequency changes. The aim is to validate this model in a large-scale external validation study in adult patients with varying degrees of sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) to confirm the high predictive value of the ACC model and to assess its test-retest reliability. A total of 80 participants, aged 18-65 years, will be enrolled in the study. The categories of severity of hearing loss will be used as a blocking factor to establish an equal distribution of patients with various degrees of sensorineural hearing loss. During the first visit, pure tone audiometry, speech in noise tests, a phoneme discrimination test, and the first ACC measurement will be performed. During the second visit (after 1-4 weeks), the same ACC measurement will be performed to assess the test-retest reliability. The acoustic change stimuli for ACC measurements consist of a reference tone with a base frequency of 1000, 2000, or 4000 Hz with a duration of 3000 ms, gliding to a 300-ms target tone with a frequency that is 12% higher than the base frequency. The primary outcome measures are (1) the level of agreement between the predicted speech reception threshold (SRT) and the behavioral SRT, and (2) the level of agreement between the SRT calculated by the first ACC measurement and the SRT of the second ACC measurement. Level of agreement will be assessed with Bland-Altman plots. Previous studies by our group have shown the high predictive value of the ACC model. The successful validation of this model as an effective and reliable biomarker of speech perception will directly benefit the general population, as it will increase the accuracy of hearing evaluations and improve access to adequate hearing rehabilitation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Speech perception tests are essential to measure the functional use of hearing and to determine the effectiveness of hearing aids and implantable auditory devices. However, these language-based tests require active participation and are influenced by linguistic and neurocognitive skills limiting their use in patients with insufficient language proficiency, cognitive impairment, or in children. We recently developed a non-attentive and objective speech perception prediction model: the Acoustic Change Complex (ACC) prediction model. The ACC prediction model uses electroencephalography to measure alterations in cortical auditory activity caused by frequency changes. The aim is to validate this model in a large-scale external validation study in adult patients with varying degrees of sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) to confirm the high predictive value of the ACC model and to assess its test-retest reliability.
METHODS
METHODS
A total of 80 participants, aged 18-65 years, will be enrolled in the study. The categories of severity of hearing loss will be used as a blocking factor to establish an equal distribution of patients with various degrees of sensorineural hearing loss. During the first visit, pure tone audiometry, speech in noise tests, a phoneme discrimination test, and the first ACC measurement will be performed. During the second visit (after 1-4 weeks), the same ACC measurement will be performed to assess the test-retest reliability. The acoustic change stimuli for ACC measurements consist of a reference tone with a base frequency of 1000, 2000, or 4000 Hz with a duration of 3000 ms, gliding to a 300-ms target tone with a frequency that is 12% higher than the base frequency. The primary outcome measures are (1) the level of agreement between the predicted speech reception threshold (SRT) and the behavioral SRT, and (2) the level of agreement between the SRT calculated by the first ACC measurement and the SRT of the second ACC measurement. Level of agreement will be assessed with Bland-Altman plots.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
Previous studies by our group have shown the high predictive value of the ACC model. The successful validation of this model as an effective and reliable biomarker of speech perception will directly benefit the general population, as it will increase the accuracy of hearing evaluations and improve access to adequate hearing rehabilitation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38263270
doi: 10.1186/s41512-024-00164-6
pii: 10.1186/s41512-024-00164-6
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1Subventions
Organisme : Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
ID : FWO T005122N
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Organization WH. Priority medicines for Europe and the World Update Report. WHO Geneva, 2013. 2013.
Chadha S, Kamenov K, Cieza A. The world report on hearing, 2021. Bull World Health Organ. 2021;99(4):242-a.
doi: 10.2471/BLT.21.285643
pubmed: 33953438
pmcid: 8085630
Carlsson PI, Hjaldahl J, Magnuson A, Ternevall E, Edén M, Skagerstrand Å, et al. Severe to profound hearing impairment: quality of life, psychosocial consequences and audiological rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(20):1849–56.
doi: 10.3109/09638288.2014.982833
pubmed: 25391816
Chia EM, Wang JJ, Rochtchina E, Cumming RR, Newall P, Mitchell P. Hearing impairment and health-related quality of life: the Blue Mountains Hearing Study. Ear Hear. 2007;28(2):187–95.
doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e31803126b6
pubmed: 17496670
Dalton DS, Cruickshanks KJ, Klein BE, Klein R, Wiley TL, Nondahl DM. The impact of hearing loss on quality of life in older adults. Gerontologist. 2003;43(5):661–8.
doi: 10.1093/geront/43.5.661
pubmed: 14570962
Livingston G, Huntley J, Sommerlad A, Ames D, Ballard C, Banerjee S, et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission. Lancet. 2020;396(10248):413–46.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30367-6
pubmed: 32738937
pmcid: 7392084
Davidson A, Marrone N, Wong B, Musiek F. Predicting Hearing Aid Satisfaction in Adults: A Systematic Review of Speech-in-noise Tests and Other Behavioral Measures. Ear Hear. 2021;42(6):1485–98.
doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001051
pubmed: 33883425
Kilman L, Zekveld A, Hällgren M, Rönnberg J. The influence of non-native language proficiency on speech perception performance. Front Psychol. 2014;5:651.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00651
pubmed: 25071630
pmcid: 4078910
Moberly AC, Castellanos I, Mattingly JK. Neurocognitive Factors Contributing to Cochlear Implant Candidacy. Otol Neurotol. 2018;39(10):e1010–8.
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002052
pubmed: 30444846
pmcid: 7037805
Derluyn I. Naar een interculturele gezondheidszorg: Aanbevelingen van de ETHEALTH-groep voor een gelijkwaardige gezondheid en gezondheidszorg voor migranten en etnische minderheden. 2011. Available from: https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal:100991 .
Parbery-Clark A, Skoe E, Lam C, Kraus N. Musician enhancement for speech-in-noise. Ear Hear. 2009;30(6):653–61.
doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181b412e9
pubmed: 19734788
Zhang F, Underwood G, McGuire K, Liang C, Moore DR, Fu Q-J. Frequency change detection and speech perception in cochlear implant users. Hear Res. 2019;379:12–20.
doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2019.04.007
pubmed: 31035223
pmcid: 6571168
Vonck BMD, Lammers MJW, van der Waals M, van Zanten GA, Versnel H. Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials in Response to Frequency Changes with Varied Magnitude, Rate, and Direction. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2019;20(5):489–98.
doi: 10.1007/s10162-019-00726-2
pubmed: 31168759
pmcid: 6797694
Vonck BMD, van Heteren JAA, Lammers MJW, de Jel DVC, Schaake WAA, van Zanten GA, et al. Cortical potentials evoked by tone frequency changes can predict speech perception in noise. Hear Res. 2022;420:108508.
doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2022.108508
pubmed: 35477512
Liang C, Earl B, Thompson I, Whitaker K, Cahn S, Xiang J, et al. Musicians are better than non-musicians in frequency change detection: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Front Neurosci. 2016;10:464.
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2016.00464
pubmed: 27826221
pmcid: 5078501
Lee J, Han JH, Lee HJ. Long-term musical training alters auditory cortical activity to the frequency change. Front Hum Neurosci. 2020;14:329.
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00329
pubmed: 32973478
pmcid: 7471721
Vonck BMD, Lammers MJW, Schaake WAA, van Zanten GA, Stokroos RJ, Versnel H. Cortical potentials evoked by tone frequency changes compared to frequency discrimination and speech perception: Thresholds in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects. Hear Res. 2021;401:108154.
doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2020.108154
pubmed: 33387905
van Wieringen A, Wouters J. LIST and LINT: sentences and numbers for quantifying speech understanding in severely impaired listeners for Flanders and the Netherlands. Int J Audiol. 2008;47(6):348–55.
doi: 10.1080/14992020801895144
pubmed: 18569107
Bosman AJ, Smoorenburg GF. Intelligibility of Dutch CVC syllables and sentences for listeners with normal hearing and with three types of hearing impairment. Audiology. 1995;34(5):260–84.
doi: 10.3109/00206099509071918
pubmed: 8837785
Govaerts PJ, Daemers K, Yperman M, De Beukelaer C, De Saegher G, De Ceulaer G. Auditory speech sounds evaluation (A§E®): a new test to assess detection, discrimination and identification in hearing impairment. Cochlear Implants Int. 2006;7(2):92–106.
doi: 10.1179/146701006807508106
pubmed: 18792377
van Heteren JAA, Vonck BMD, Stokroos RJ, Versnel H, Lammers MJW. The acoustic change complex compared to hearing performance in unilaterally and bilaterally deaf cochlear implant users. Ear Hear. 2022;43(6):1783–99.
doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001248
pubmed: 35696186
pmcid: 9592183
Olusanya BO, Davis AC, Hoffman HJ. Hearing loss grades and the International classification of functioning, disability and health. Bull World Health Organ. 2019;97(10):725–8.
doi: 10.2471/BLT.19.230367
pubmed: 31656340
pmcid: 6796665
Lammers MJ, van Eijl RH, van Zanten GA, Versnel H, Grolman W. Delayed auditory brainstem responses in prelingually deaf and late-implanted cochlear implant users. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 2015;16(5):669–78.
doi: 10.1007/s10162-015-0532-x
pubmed: 26162414
pmcid: 4569605
Legris E, Gomot M, Charpentier J, Aoustin JM, Aussedat C, Bakhos D. Assessment of auditory discrimination in hearing-impaired patients. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2018;135(5):335–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.anorl.2018.04.004
pubmed: 29709388
Soleimani M, Rouhbakhsh N, Rahbar N. Towards early intervention of hearing instruments using cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs): a systematic review. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2021;144:110698.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2021.110698
pubmed: 33839460
Benítez-Barrera CR, Key AP, Ricketts TA, Tharpe AM. Central auditory system responses from children while listening to speech in noise. Hear Res. 2021;403:108165.
doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2020.108165
pubmed: 33485110
Gommeren H, Bosmans J, Cardon E, Mertens G, Cras P, Engelborghs S, et al. Cortical auditory evoked potentials in cognitive impairment and their relevance to hearing loss: a systematic review highlighting the evidence gap. Front Neurosci. 2021;15:781322.
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2021.781322
pubmed: 34867176
pmcid: 8637533
Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, Moons KG. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement. BMC Med. 2015;13:1.
doi: 10.1186/s12916-014-0241-z
pubmed: 25563062
pmcid: 4284921
Moons KG, Altman DG, Reitsma JB, Ioannidis JP, Macaskill P, Steyerberg EW, et al. Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(1):W1-73.
doi: 10.7326/M14-0698
pubmed: 25560730