The Characteristic of Auditory Function and Cochlear Synaptopathy in a Noise-exposed Cohort: A Cross-sectional Study
Li, B.; Wang, Q.; Yang, L.; Li, Y.; Huang, Z.; Wu, H.
Show abstract
BackgroundTo determine the characteristics and sex differences of auditory perception and cochlear function in individuals with long-term occupational noise exposure. MethodsYoung workers with long-term occupational noise exposure from a shipyard were recruited in the current study as the hidden hearing loss (HHL) risk group. Age-matched office workers in the same shipyard who had no occupational noise-exposure history were enrolled in the control group. The auditory processing ability of speech-in-noise (SIN) score and gap detection threshold (GDT) were further examined by sex. The cochlear function of action potential (AP) and summating potential (SP)/AP values were tested and compared by sex and side. The correlation between the SIN score and cochlear function was studied by sex. The correlation between either auditory processing ability or cochlear function and occupational-noise working length (OWL) was also analysed in the HHL risk group. ResultsSignificantly decreased SIN scores and a higher GDT of the 4 kHz gap marker were only found in men in the HHL risk group. Although the hearing thresholds of the women in the HHL risk group were slightly but significantly worse than those of the women in the control group, no significant defects in auditory processing or temporal resolution were found between the two groups. Significantly decreased cochlear function and increased SP/AP values in the left ear were only found in men in the HHL risk group. Neither the AP amplitude nor the AP latency differed significantly between the two groups by sex. A correlation study indicated that only the correlation between the SIN score and the AP amplitude of the right ear in men was significant. No significant difference was found between the SIN score and cochlear function in women. The AP latency of the right ear was only significantly correlated with OWL in men. ConclusionIn long-term occupational working exposure individuals with normal hearing, defects in auditory processing, temporal resolution and cochlear function showed sex differences, none of which were significant in women. In men, a weak correlation between the SIN score and the AP amplitude of the right ear was found. There was only a weak correlation between OWL and the AP latency of the right ear in men. Our findings indicate men are more vulnerable to occupational noise than women. Considering the noise-exposure dose differences between the control and HHL risk groups, our measures are insensitive to cochlear synaptopathy in humans.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Auditory tests for characterizing hearing deficits in listeners with various hearing abilities: The BEAR test battery 97%
- Neural correlates of masked and unmasked tones: psychoacoustics and late auditory evoked potentials (LAEPs) 95%
- Hearing Loss and Tinnitus: Uncover the Mechanism of Tinnitus using Resting-State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (rs-fMRI) Technologies 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Air-Conduction And Bone-Conduction Reference Threshold Levels – A Multicenter Study 97%
- Intrasubject variability in Potential Early Markers of Sensorineural Hearing Damage 96%
- The relationship between distortion product otoacoustic emissions and audiometric thresholds in the extended high-frequency range 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Pterostilbene Protects Cochlea from Ototoxicity in Streptozotocin-Induced Diabetic Rats by Inhibiting the Apoptosis 95%
- Supra-threshold perception and neural representation of tones presented in noise in conditions of masking release 94%
- Validation of morphological ear classification devised by principal component analysis using three-dimensional images for human identification 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.