The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2020
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-58503-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electro-Haptic Enhancement of Spatial Hearing in Cochlear Implant Users

Abstract: cochlear implants (cis) have enabled hundreds of thousands of profoundly hearing-impaired people to perceive sounds by electrically stimulating the auditory nerve. However, ci users are often very poor at locating sounds, which leads to impaired sound segregation and threat detection. We provided missing spatial hearing cues through haptic stimulation to augment the electrical ci signal. We found that this "electro-haptic" stimulation dramatically improved sound localisation. furthermore, participants were abl… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

3
90
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(99 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
3
90
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For the best performing CI users-those that are either bilaterally implanted or are unilaterally implanted with normal hearing in the non-implanted ear-RMS localisation error is ~ 28°4. This is similar to the 30° RMS error measured for sound-localisation using haptic stimulation in unilateral CI users by Fletcher et al 10 . Note that, in these studies, performance was assessed using a single speech or noise stimulus, not a varied stimulus set.…”
supporting
confidence: 89%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…For the best performing CI users-those that are either bilaterally implanted or are unilaterally implanted with normal hearing in the non-implanted ear-RMS localisation error is ~ 28°4. This is similar to the 30° RMS error measured for sound-localisation using haptic stimulation in unilateral CI users by Fletcher et al 10 . Note that, in these studies, performance was assessed using a single speech or noise stimulus, not a varied stimulus set.…”
supporting
confidence: 89%
“…Those performing worst before training were found to improve most with training. Accuracy after training was substantially better than haptic sound-localisation performance measured after training in Fletcher et al 10 (26° RMS error), in which participants were tested using the same speech sample that was used in training. In fact, the worst performer after training in the current study www.nature.com/scientificreports/ performed with the same accuracy as the average participant in Fletcher et al Strikingly, the accuracy measured after training in the current study was also better than the average sound-localisation performance of bilateral hearing-aid users (~ 25° RMS error using a varied stimulus set) 22 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 65%
See 3 more Smart Citations