Data-driven approach for auditory profiling

Nowadays, the pure-tone audiogram is the main tool used to characterize hearing loss and to fit hearing aids. However, the perceptual consequences of hearing loss are typically not only associated with a loss of sensitivity, but also with a clarity loss that is not captured by the audiogram. A detailed characterization of hearing loss has to be simplified to efficiently explore the specific compensation needs of the individual listener. We hypothesized that any listener's hearing can be characterized along two dimensions of distortion: type I and type II. While type I can be linked to factors affecting audibility, type II reflects non-audibility-related distortions. To test our hypothesis, the individual performance data from two previous studies were re-analyzed using an archetypal analysis. Unsupervised learning was used to identify extreme patterns in the data which form the basis for different auditory profiles. Next, a decision tree was determined to classify the listeners into one of the profiles. The new analysis provides evidence for the existence of four profiles in the data. The most significant predictors for profile identification were related to binaural processing, auditory non-linearity and speech-in-noise perception. The current approach is promising for analyzing other existing data sets in order to select the most relevant tests for auditory profiling.

[1]  Birger Kollmeier,et al.  Functionality of hearing aids: state-of-the-art and future model-based solutions , 2018, International journal of audiology.

[2]  F. Palumbo,et al.  Archetypal analysis for data‐driven prototype identification , 2017, Stat. Anal. Data Min..

[3]  Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda,et al.  Why do I hear but not understand? Stochastic undersampling as a model of degraded neural encoding of speech , 2014, Front. Neurosci..

[4]  T. Dau,et al.  Auditory profiling and hearing-aid satisfaction in hearing-aid candidates. , 2016, Danish medical journal.

[5]  R Plomp,et al.  Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. , 1978, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  Enrique A. Lopez-Poveda,et al.  The Influence of Cochlear Mechanical Dysfunction, Temporal Processing Deficits, and Age on the Intelligibility of Audible Speech in Noise for Hearing-Impaired Listeners , 2016, Trends in hearing.

[7]  B. Moore,et al.  Psychoacoustic abilities of subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear hearing impairments and their relationship to the ability to understand speech. , 1989, Scandinavian audiology. Supplementum.

[8]  Mark A. Eckert,et al.  Classifying Human Audiometric Phenotypes of Age-Related Hearing Loss from Animal Models , 2013, Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology.

[9]  The role of tuning curve variables and threshold measures in the estimation of sensory cell loss. , 1993, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[10]  Torsten Dau,et al.  Relations between frequency selectivity, temporal fine-structure processing, and speech reception in impaired hearing. , 2009, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  Y Sininger,et al.  Temporal and speech processing de ® cits in auditory neuropathy , 1999 .

[12]  R. Salvi,et al.  Insensitivity of the audiogram to carboplatin induced inner hair cell loss in chinchillas , 2013, Hearing Research.