Accuracy of smartphone-based hearing screening tests: a systematic review

Melo, Inara Maria Monteiro; Silva, Aline Roberta Xavier; Camargo, Rodolpho; Cavalcanti, Hannalice Gottschalck; Ferrari, Déborah Viviane; Taveira, Karinna Veríssimo Meira; Balen, Sheila Andreoli

doi:10.1590/2317-1782/20212020380

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(113 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is marginally higher than the hearX group's published results, which quote 94.4 per cent in an adult population. 1 However, in our sample 8 kHz had a much lower average clinical agreement rate of 71.3 per cent, deeming 8 kHz on hearTest unreliable for diagnosing the severity of hearing loss. Furthermore, hearTest has an average of 97.1 per cent accuracy of diagnosing normal hearing (less than 25 dB) across all of the tested frequencies.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 59%

“…Medical health applications offer a huge potential for the improvement of clinical practice and development of how we deliver healthcare to patients. Medical applications have been developed to test for hearing loss, 1 although these are not widely utilised within the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK. Several reports have demonstrated that hearing test threshold values achieved using automated audiometry are similar in reliability compared with results obtained by an audiologist using the conventional manual pure tone audiometry.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The role of a mobile hearing application in secondary care ENT (HAppENT)

Thompson,

Abdelhamid,

Khudan

et al. 2023

J. Laryngol. Otol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Sudden hearing loss is a common presentation to ENT. In the authors’ practice, patients often wait many weeks for formal hearing testing. This study aimed to assess whether a tablet-based hearing test, hearTest, could aid clinical decision-making within secondary care ENT. Method This was a multi-centre, prospective, non-randomised study to assess the feasibility, usability and accuracy of hearTest. Results In the sample, hearTest was shown to be an acceptable method of testing for hearing loss by both patients and clinicians. The 0.5–4 kHz range had an average clinical agreement rate of 95.1 per cent when compared with formal pure tone audiometry, deeming it an accurate test to diagnose hearing loss. Conclusion The authors propose that hearTest can be used within ENT as a clinical decision support tool when manual audiometry is not immediately available. Within the authors’ practice, hearTest is used to aid diagnosis and management of sudden sensorineural hearing loss.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 59%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of a mobile hearing application in secondary care ENT (HAppENT)

Thompson,

Abdelhamid,

Khudan

et al. 2023

J. Laryngol. Otol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This will help future studies to develop PRSs for objective hearing loss. Fast, high-quality hearing applications now make objective data collection more feasible at the population level …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fast, high-quality hearing applications now make objective data collection more feasible at the population level. 43,44…”

Section: Implications Of Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of Polygenic Risk Scores for Hearing Difficulty in Older Adults With Hearing Loss in Mid-Childhood and Midlife

Wang

Lange

Sung

et al. 2023

JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportanceAlthough more than 200 genes have been associated with monogenic congenital hearing loss, the polygenic contribution to hearing decline across the life course remains largely unknown.ObjectiveTo examine the association of polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for self-reported hearing difficulty among adults (40-69 years) with measured hearing and speech reception abilities in mid-childhood and early midlife.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis was a population-based cross-sectional study nested within the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children that included 1608 children and 1642 adults. Pure tone audiometry, speech reception threshold against noise, and genetic data were evaluated. Linear and logistic regressions of PRSs were conducted for hearing outcomes. Study analysis was performed from March 1 to 31, 2022.Main Outcomes and MeasuresGenotypes were generated from saliva or blood using global single-nucleotide polymorphisms array and PRSs derived from published genome-wide association studies of self-reported hearing difficulty (PRS1) and hearing aid use (PRS2). Hearing outcomes were continuous using the high Fletcher index (mean hearing threshold, 1, 2, and 4 kHz) and speech reception threshold (SRT); and dichotomized for bilateral hearing loss of more than 15 dB HL and abnormal SRT.ResultsIncluded in the study were 1608 children (mean [SD] age, 11.5 [0.5] years; 812 [50.5%] male children; 1365 [84.9%] European and 243[15.1%] non-European) and 1642 adults (mean [SD] age, 43.7 [5.1] years; 1442 [87.8%] female adults; 1430 [87.1%] European and 212 [12.9%] non-European individuals). In adults, both PRS1 and PRS2 were associated with hearing thresholds. For each SD increment in PRS1 and PRS2, hearing thresholds were 0.4 (95% CI, 0-0.8) decibel hearing level (dB HL) and 0.9 (95% CI, 0.5-1.2) dB HL higher on the high Fletcher index, respectively. Each SD increment in PRS increased the odds of adult hearing loss of more than 15 dB HL by 10% to 30% (OR for PRS1, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.3; OR for PRS2, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.5). Similar but attenuated patterns were noted in children (OR for PRS1, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.8-1.2; OR for PRS2, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.5). Both PRSs showed minimal evidence of associations with speech reception thresholds or abnormal SRT in children or adults.Conclusions and RelevanceThis population-based cross-sectional study of PRSs for self-reported hearing difficulty among adults found an association with hearing ability in mid-childhood. This adds to the evidence that age-related hearing loss begins as early as the first decade of life and that polygenic inheritance may play a role together with other environmental risk factors.

show abstract

Assessing the accuracy and reliability of application-based audiometry for hearing evaluation

Lee,

Seo,

Jung

et al. 2024

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pure-tone audiometry (PTA) is the gold standard for assessing hearing loss. However, traditional PTA tests require specialized equipment, trained personnel, and a soundproof environment. Recently, smartphone-based PTA tests have been developed as an alternative method for hearing assessment. The aim of this study was to validate the accuracy and reliability of a smartphone application-based audiometry test. This study was conducted to assess the performance of application-based audiometry from November 2021 to January 2022. Pure-tone thresholds were measured using a smartphone application-based PTA test and compared with results obtained using a traditional audiometer in a sound-treated booth. The smartphone application used in this study was the "Care4Ear (Care4ear, version 1.0.6, MIJ Co., Ltd.)". Hearing thresholds less than 35 dB HL were classified as group A, 35-64 dB HL as group B, and 65 dB HL or greater as group C for the classification of hearing levels. We evaluated the accuracy of smartphone audiometry for each group and compared the results of frequency-specific hearing tests. Additionally, we examined the results of smartphone audiometry in individuals (n = 27) with asymmetric hearing loss. Seventy subjects completed both conventional audiometry and smartphone application-based hearing tests. Among the ears assessed, 55.7% were classified as group A, while 25.7% and 18.6% were classified as group B and group C, respectively. The average hearing threshold obtained from conventional pure-tone audiometry was 37.7 ± 25.2 dB HL, whereas the application-based hearing test yielded thresholds of 21.0 ± 23.0 dB HL. A significant correlation (r = 0.69, p < 0.01) was found between the average hearing thresholds obtained from the application-based and conventional pure-tone audiometry tests. The application-based test achieved a 97.4% hit rate for classifying hearing thresholds as class A, but lower rates of 22.2% for class B and 38.5% for class C. Notably, a discrepancy was observed between the hearing threshold measured by the application and the conventional audiometry for the worse ear with asymmetric hearing. The smartphone-based audiometry is a feasible method for hearing evaluation especially in persons with normal hearing. In cases of hearing loss or asymmetric hearing loss, the results of the application-based audiometry may be inaccurate, limiting its diagnostic utility.

show abstract

Accuracy of smartphone-based hearing screening tests: a systematic review

Cited by 6 publications

References 43 publications

The role of a mobile hearing application in secondary care ENT (HAppENT)

The role of a mobile hearing application in secondary care ENT (HAppENT)

Association of Polygenic Risk Scores for Hearing Difficulty in Older Adults With Hearing Loss in Mid-Childhood and Midlife

Assessing the accuracy and reliability of application-based audiometry for hearing evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About