Application of Neural Network Modeling to Identify Auditory Processing Disorders in School-Age Children

P300 Auditory Event-Related Potentials (P3AERPs) were recorded in nine school-age children with auditory processing disorders and nine age- and gender-matched controls in response to tone burst stimuli presented at varying rates (1/second or 3/second) under varying levels of competing noise (0 dB, 40 dB, or 60 dB SPL). Neural network modeling results indicated that speed of information processing and task-related demands significantly influenced P3AERP latency in children with auditory processing disorders. Competing noise and rapid stimulus rates influenced P3AERP amplitude in both groups.

[1]  F. Musiek,et al.  P300 results in patients with lesions of the auditory areas of the cerebrum. , 1992, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[2]  Ali Keshavarzi,et al.  Comparison of Artificial Neural Network and Multivariate Regression Methods in Prediction of Soil Cation Exchange Capacity , 2010 .

[3]  M. T. Salamat,et al.  Interactions among variables in the P300 response to a continuous performance task. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[4]  R. Johnson.  A triarchic model of P300 amplitude. , 1986, Psychophysiology.

[5]  S. Krishnamurti,et al.  A case study of the changes in the speech-evoked auditory brainstem response associated with auditory training in children with auditory processing disorders. , 2013, International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology.

[6]  J. Polich.  Habituation of P300 from auditory stimuli , 1989, Psychobiology.

[7]  F. Musiek.  Habilitation and management of auditory processing disorders: overview of selected procedures. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[8]  R. Schow,et al.  A new CAPD battery--multiple auditory processing assessment: factor analysis and comparisons with SCAN. , 2000, American journal of audiology.

[9]  Sridhar Krishnamurti,et al.  Neural network modeling of central auditory dysfunction in Alzheimer's disease , 2011, Neural Networks.

[10]  M. T. Salamat,et al.  Interactions among variables in the P300 response to a continuous performance task in normal and ADHD adults. , 2004, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[11]  A. Starr,et al.  P300 latency correlates with digit span. , 1983, Psychophysiology.

[12]  F E Musiek,et al.  Frequency (pitch) and duration pattern tests. , 1994, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[13]  S. Krishnamurti.  P300 Auditory Event-Related Potentials in Binaural and Competing Noise Conditions in Adults With Central Auditory Processing Disorders , 2001 .

[14]  R. Jirsa.  The clinical utility of the P3 AERP in children with auditory processing disorders. , 1992, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[15]  Gail D. Chermak,et al.  Central Auditory Processing Disorders: New Perspectives , 1997 .

[16]  E R John,et al.  Information Delivery and the Sensory Evoked Potential , 1967, Science.

[17]  E. Donchin.  Presidential address, 1980. Surprise!...Surprise? , 1981, Psychophysiology.

[18]  B S Kopell,et al.  Auditory stimulus intensity effects on components of the late positive complex. , 1982, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[19]  James W. Hall.  Handbook of Auditory Evoked Responses , 1991 .

[20]  Sridhar Krishnamurti.  Role of P300 auditory event-related potentials in evaluating auditory processing disorders , 2005 .

[21]  E Donchin,et al.  The time constant in P300 recording. , 1979, Psychophysiology.

[22]  J. Polich,et al.  P300, probability, and interstimulus interval. , 1990, Psychophysiology.

[23]  J. Cohen,et al.  P300, stimulus intensity, modality, and probability. , 1996, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[24]  Teri James Bellis,et al.  Assessment and Management of Central Auditory Processing Disorders in the Educational Setting: From Science to Practice , 1996 .

[25]  F. Musiek,et al.  Nonmodularity of the central auditory nervous system: implications for (central) auditory processing disorder. , 2005, American journal of audiology.

[26]  D. McFarland,et al.  Factors influencing tests of auditory processing: a perspective on current issues and relevant concerns. , 2013, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[27]  S. Rosen,et al.  Auditory and cognitive abilities of children suspected of auditory processing disorder (APD). , 2010, International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology.

[28]  P300 sequence effects differ between children and adults for auditory stimuli. , 1999, Psychophysiology.

[29]  D. McFarland,et al.  The importance of modality specificity in diagnosing central auditory processing disorder. , 2005, American journal of audiology.

[30]  J. Polich.  Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[31]  Sean J. O'Connor,et al.  P300 topography of amplitude/latency correlations , 2005, Brain Topography.

[32]  G. Dawson,et al.  A comparison of hemispheric asymmetries in speech-related brain potentials of autistic and dysphasic children , 1989, Brain and Language.

[33]  Nina Kraus,et al.  Auditory training improves neural timing in the human brainstem , 2005, Behavioural Brain Research.

[34]  J. Polich,et al.  Attention, probability, and task demands as determinants of P300 latency from auditory stimuli. , 1986, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[35]  R. Jirsa,et al.  Long latency auditory event-related potentials from children with auditory processing disorders. , 1990, Ear and hearing.

[36]  Li Liu,et al.  Neural network modeling for surgical decisions on traumatic brain injury patients , 2000, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[37]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Parallel distributed processing: explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 1: foundations , 1986 .

[38]  R. Johnson,et al.  On the neural generators of the P300 component of the event-related potential. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[39]  Diana C Emanuel,et al.  The auditory processing battery: survey of common practices. , 2002, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[40]  E. John,et al.  Evoked-Potential Correlates of Stimulus Uncertainty , 1965, Science.

[41]  Bernard Widrow,et al.  30 years of adaptive neural networks: perceptron, Madaline, and backpropagation , 1990, Proc. IEEE.

[42]  J Jerger,et al.  Report of the Consensus Conference on the Diagnosis of Auditory Processing Disorders in School-Aged Children. , 2000, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[43]  A. Harkrider,et al.  Neurophysiological indices of speech and nonspeech stimulus processing. , 2005, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[44]  Shigeo Yamamura,et al.  Clinical application of artificial neural network (ANN) modeling to predict pharmacokinetic parameters of severely ill patients. , 2003, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[45]  F E Musiek,et al.  Frequency patterns in cochlear, brainstem, and cerebral lesions. , 1987, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[46]  S D Dalebout,et al.  Comparison of the intersubject and intrasubject variability of exogenous and endogenous auditory evoked potentials. , 1997, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[47]  S. Dalebout,et al.  Determining latency and amplitude for multiple peaked P300 waveforms. , 1991, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[48]  F. Musiek,et al.  The auditory P300 at or near threshold. , 2005, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[49]  F. Musiek,et al.  Duration pattern recognition in normal subjects and patients with cerebral and cochlear lesions. , 1990, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[50]  Antonio Fernando Catelli Infantosi,et al.  Artificial neural networks for infant mortality modelling , 2002, Comput. Methods Programs Biomed..

[51]  E Halgren,et al.  Endogenous potentials evoked in simple cognitive tasks: scalp topography. , 1987, The International journal of neuroscience.