Towards a diagnostic test for hidden hearing loss

  • Christopher J. Plack The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, England
  • Garreth Prendergast The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, England
  • Karolina Kluk The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, England
  • Agnès Léger The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, England
  • Hannah Guest The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, England
  • Kevin J. Munro The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, England


Cochlear synaptopathy (or “hidden hearing loss”), due to noise exposure or ageing, has been demonstrated in animal models using histological techniques. However, diagnosis of the condition in individual humans is problematic because of: (i) test reliability, and (ii) lack of a gold standard validation measure. Wave I of the transient-evoked auditory brainstem response (ABR) is a non-invasive electrophysiological measure of auditory nerve function, and has been validated in the animal models. However, in humans Wave I amplitude shows high variability both between and within individuals. The frequency-following response (FFR), a sustained evoked potential reflecting synchronous neural activity in the rostral brainstem, is potentially more robust than ABR wave I. However, the FFR is a measure of central activity, and may be dependent on individual differences in central processing. Psychophysical measures are also affected by inter-subject variability in central processing. Differential measures, in which the measure is compared, within an individual, between conditions that are affected differently by cochlear synaptopathy, may help to reduce inter-subject variability due to unrelated factors. There is also the issue of how the metric will be validated. Comparisons with animal models, computational modeling, auditory nerve imaging, and human temporal bone histology are all potential options for validation, but there are technical and practical hurdles, and difficulties in interpretation. Despite the obstacles, a diagnostic test for hidden hearing loss is a worthwhile goal, with important implications for clinical practice and health surveillance.


Alvord, L.S. (1983). “Cochlear dysfunction in "normal-hearing" patients with history of noise exposure,” Ear. Hearing, 4, 247-250.

Barker, D., Hopkins, K., Baker, R., and Plack, C.J. (2014). “Detecting the early effects of noise exposure,” in Midwinter Meeting of Association for Research in Otolaryngology (San Diego).

Beattie, R.C. (1988). “Interaction of click polarity, stimulus level, and repetition rate on the auditory brainstem response,” Scand. Audiol., 17, 99-109.

Bharadwaj, H.M., Masud, S., Mehraei, G., Verhulst, S., and Shinn-Cunningham, B.G. (2015). “Individual differences reveal correlates of hidden hearing deficits,” J. Neurosci., 35, 2161-2172.

Bones, O. and Plack, C. J. (2015). “Losing the music: aging affects the perception and subcortical neural representation of musical harmony,” J. Neurosci., 35, 4071-4080.

Buus, S. and Florentine, M. (1991). “Psychometric functions for level discrimina-tion,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 90, 1371-1380.
Clinard, C.G. and Tremblay, K.L. (2013). “Aging degrades the neural encoding of simple and complex sounds in the human brainstem,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 24, 590-599.

Don, M. and Eggermont, J.J. (1978). “Analysis of the click-evoked brainstem potentials in man unsing high-pass noise masking,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 63, 1084-1092.

Dubno, J.R., Dirks, D.D., and Morgan, D.E. (1984). “Effects of age and mild hearing loss on speech recognition in noise,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 76, 87-96.

Epp, B., Hots, J., Verhey, J.L., and Schaette, R. (2012). “Increased intensity discrimination thresholds in tinnitus subjects with a normal audiogram,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 132, EL196-201.

Furman, A.C., Kujawa, S.G., and Liberman, M.C. (2013). “Noise-induced cochlear neuropathy is selective for fibers with low spontaneous rates,” J. Neurophysiol., 110, 577-586.

Johnson, E.W. (1970). “Tuning forks to audiometers and back again,” Laryngo-scope, 80, 49-68.

King, A., Hopkins, K., and Plack, C.J. (2013). “Differences in short-term training for interaural phase difference discrimination between two different forced-choice paradigms,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 134, 2635-2638.

Konrad-Martin, D., Dille, M.F., McMillan, G., Griest, S., McDermott, D., Fausti, S. A., and Austin, D.F. (2012). “Age-related changes in the auditory brainstem response,” J. Am. Acad. Audiol., 23, 18-35.

Krishnan, A., Xu, Y., Gandour, J., and Cariani, P. (2005). “Encoding of pitch in the human brainstem is sensitive to language experience,” Cogn. Brain Res., 25, 161-168.

Krishnan, A. (2006). “Frequency-following response,” in Auditory evoked poten-tials: basic principles and clinical application. Eds. R.F. Burkhard, M. Don, and J. Eggermont (Lipincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia), pp. 313-333.

Kujawa, S.G. and Liberman, M.C. (2009). “Adding insult to injury: cochlear nerve degeneration after "temporary" noise-induced hearing loss,” J. Neurosci., 29, 14077-14085.

Kumar, U.A., Ameenudin, S., and Sangamanatha, A.V. (2012). “Temporal and speech processing skills in normal hearing individuals exposed to occupational noise,” Noise Health, 14, 100-105.

Lauter, J.L. and Loomis, R.L. (1988). “Individual differences in auditory electric responses: comparisons of between-subject and within-subject variability. II. Amplitude of brainstem Vertex-positive peaks,” Scand. Audiol., 17, 87-92.

Makary, C.A., Shin, J., Kujawa, S.G., Liberman, M.C., and Merchant, S.N. (2011). “Age-related primary cochlear neuronal degeneration in human temporal bones,” J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol., 12, 711-717.

Marmel, F., Linley, D., Carlyon, R.P., Gockel, H.E., Hopkins, K., and Plack, C.J. (2013). “Subcortical neural synchrony and absolute thresholds predict frequency discrimination independently,” J. Assoc. Res. Otolaryngol., 14, 757-766.

Oxenham, A.J. and Plack, C.J. (1997). “A behavioral measure of basilar-membrane nonlinearity in listeners with normal and impaired hearing,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 101, 3666-3675.

Plack, C.J., Barker, D., and Prendergast, G. (2014). “Perceptual consequences of “hidden” hearing loss,” Trends Hear., 18.

Rajan, R. and Cainer, K.E. (2008). “Ageing without hearing loss or cognitive impairment causes a decrease in speech intelligibility only in informational maskers,” Neuroscience, 154, 784-795.

Schaette, R. and McAlpine, D. (2011). “Tinnitus with a normal audiogram: physiological evidence for hidden hearing loss and computational model,” J. Neurosci., 31, 13452-13457.

Schwartz, D.M. and Berry, G.A. (1985). “Normative aspects of the ABR,” in The auditory brainstem response. Ed. J.T. Jacobson (Taylor and Francis, London), pp. 65-97.

Sergeyenko, Y., Lall, K., Liberman, M.C., and Kujawa, S.G. (2013). “Age-related cochlear synaptopathy: an early-onset contributor to auditory functional decline,” J. Neurosci., 33, 13686-13694.

Stamper, G.C. and Johnson, T.A. (2015). “Auditory function in normal-hearing, noise-exposed human ears,” Ear. Hearing, 36, 172-184.

Wong, P.C.M., Skoe, E., Russo, N.M., Dees, T., and Kraus, N. (2007). “Musical experience shapes human brainstem encoding of linguistic pitch patterns,” Nat. Neurosci., 10, 420-422.

Zilany, M.S., Bruce, I.C., Nelson, P.C., and Carney, L.H. (2009). “A phenomeno-logical model of the synapse between the inner hair cell and auditory nerve: long-term adaptation with power-law dynamics,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 126, 2390-2412.
How to Cite
PLACK, Christopher J. et al. Towards a diagnostic test for hidden hearing loss. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Auditory and Audiological Research, [S.l.], v. 5, p. 89-99, dec. 2015. Available at: <>. Date accessed: 20 nov. 2017.
2015/2. Hidden hearing loss: Neural degeneration in "normal" hearing