1,720,996 research outputs found
Inherited neuropathies and deafness caused by a PMP22 point mutation: a case report and a review of the literature
No full textNo abstrac
Steady State Auditory Evoked Potentials in Normal Hearing Subjects: Evaluation of Threshold and Testing Time
No full textBackground: Steady state responses (SSRs), between 75 and 110 Hz, evoked by auditory amplitude modulated single or multiple tone stimuli, may be used to estimate objective hearing threshold. Methods: The aim of this study was to compare SSRs and click-evoked auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) in both ears of 20 adults (10 males and 10 females, aged between 24 and 36 years) with normal hearing threshold. Results: Mean ABR threshold was found at 21.25 (±5.9) dB nHL. Mean SSR threshold was found at 15.6 (±9.6) dB nHL after a single frequency stimulus (1 kHz); at 10.5 (±18.2) dB nHL and at 7.1 (±12.4) dB nHL after bifrequency stimulation (0.5 and 2 kHz). SSR thresholds after multifrequency stimulation (0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz) were found, respectively, at 12.1 (±12.9) dB nHL, 12.2 (±12.8) dB nHL, 12.3 (±8.3) dB nHL and 18.9 (±17.2) dB nHL. Mean duration of the recording session was 6 min in the case of ABRs, while it was 25 min in the single frequency condition and 29 min in the multifrequency condition in the case of SSRs. Conclusion: SSRs can be used for frequency-specific objective audiometry. The multifrequency stimulation greatly reduces the whole testing time
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
