Auditory Recognition of Words and Digits in Multitalker Babble in Learning-Disabled Children with Dichotic Listening Deficit

Mahdavi, Mohammad Ebrahim; Pourbakht, Akram; Parand, Akram; Jalaie, Shohreh; Rezaeian, Maryam; Moradiju, Elham

doi:10.5812/ircmj.42817

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The current study employed the paired DDT and WIN tests to determine the presence of APD in the patient group or the absence of APD in the control group, and the normative data of paired DDT and WIN tests in the studies by Rezapur et al and Mahdavi et al respectively [16,17]. Then the Fisher checklist was administered to the two groups (normal children in the control group and children with APD in the patient group).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Translation, Validity, and Reliability of the Persian Version of the Fisher Auditory Problems Checklist

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:In 1996, American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) introduced the need for an appropriate screening tool for Auditory Processing Disorder (APD). Questionnaires are one of the tools to screen APD, of which the most frequent one is the Fisher auditory checklist. The current study aimed at translating and determining the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the Fisher checklist. Materials and Methods:The current checklist developing study was conducted on 25 children (12 males and 13 females) aged 8 to 12 years (Mean±SD=9.4±1. 3) with APD as the case group, and 25 normal children (14 males and 11 females) aged 8 to 12 years (Mean±SD=9.5±1.4) as the control group. The translation process was performed according to international guidelines. Indicators of formal validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency of the questionnaire were assessed. Then, to check the effectiveness of the questionnaire to identify children with APD and normal children, the checklist was examined along with paired Dichotic Digit Test (DDT) and Word in Noise Tests (WNT). Results:The average score of the Persian version of the Fisher checklist was 46.6±16.7 in the case group and 94.7±12.5 in the control group. The Cronbach's alpha for the Fisher checklist at the test stage was 0.827 and in the retest stage, the Cronbach's alpha in the patient group was 0.845 and in the control group was 0.709. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) values in the case and control groups were 0.708 and 0.744, respectively. Conclusion:According to the results of DDT and WNT, the Persian version of the Fisher checklist had face validity (face value: 3.4) and intrinsic reliability of APD detection.According to the results of the current study, the Persian version of the Fisher Auditory Problems Checklist had good validity and reliability and can be recommended to screen people with APD along with other tools.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hearing sensitivity in all participants was ≤20 dB HL at octave frequencies from 125-8000 Hz with symmetric thresholds bilaterally. Word in Noise Test (WNT) [16] and the paired Dichotic Digit Test (DDT) [17] were conducted in a free recall approach [16,18].…”

Section: Modern Rehabilitationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translation, Validity, and Reliability of the Persian Version of the Fisher Auditory Problems Checklist

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study, the Persian version of the DIN test, FARDIN, was used to measure the participant’s speech perception performance in the presence of noise. The FARDIN, which has been developed and validated by Mahdavi, et al, [ 20 ] is based on the study of Heidari, et al, [ 21 ] and is calculated in terms of the SNR needed for reaching 50% correct recognition of Persian monosyllabic digits from 1 to 10, formatted as three unique digit triplet. For FARDIN, using two equivalent lists of digit triplets, noise was presented at 15 dB SL (15 dB above most comfortable level) from a laptop connected to the clinical audiometer via a front calibrated speaker located 1 m away from the subject.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory Recognition of Digit-in-Noise under Unaided and Aided Conditions in Moderate and Severe Sensorineural Hearing Loss

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: The speech-in-noise test is typically performed using an audiometer. The results of the digit-in-noise recognition (DIN) test may be influenced by the flat frequency response of free-field audiometry and frequency of the hearing aid fit based on fitting rationale. This study aims to investigate the DIN test in unaided and aided conditions. Subjects and Methods: Thirty four adults with moderate and severe sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) participated in the study. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for 50% of the DIN test was obtained in the following two conditions: 1) the unaided condition, performed using an audiometer in a free field; and 2) aided condition, performed using a hearing aid with an unvented individual earmold that was fitted based on NAL-NL2.Results: There was a statistically significant elevation in the mean SNR for the severe SNHL group in both test conditions when compared with that of the moderate SNHL group. In both groups, the SNR for the aided condition was significantly lower than that of the unaided condition.Conclusions: Speech recognition in hearing-impaired patients can be realized by fitting hearing aids based on evidence-based fitting rationale rather than by measuring it using free-field audiometry measurement that is utilized in a routine clinic setup.

show abstract

“… 26 The test has acceptable test–retest reliability for assessment of word recognition ability in noise. 27 , 28 This test includes three lists of 35 perceptually homogenized monosyllabic words which are recorded in the presence of multi-talker babble noise of six Persian speakers. We used List 1 for the right ear, List 2 for the left ear and List 3 for the binaural condition.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We used List 1 for the right ear, List 2 for the left ear and List 3 for the binaural condition. As defined by Mahdavi et al, 27 the test was presented in an audiometric booth at 60 dB HL by connecting a compact disc player to an audiometer. Words were presented monaurally in descending order in different signal-to-noise ratios from +24 to 0 dB in 4 dB steps.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech-in-noise perception ability can be related to auditory efferent pathway function: a comparative study in reading impaired and normal reading children

Akbari

Panahi

Valadbeigi

et al. 2020

Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory Recognition of Words and Digits in Multitalker Babble in Learning-Disabled Children with Dichotic Listening Deficit

Abstract: Background: Previous studies have reported the weakness of recognition of speech-in-noise and dichotic listening deficit in Learning-Disabled (LD) children. This study aimed at further investigating these two deficits in LD children.

Cited by 3 publications

References 14 publications

Translation, Validity, and Reliability of the Persian Version of the Fisher Auditory Problems Checklist

Translation, Validity, and Reliability of the Persian Version of the Fisher Auditory Problems Checklist

Auditory Recognition of Digit-in-Noise under Unaided and Aided Conditions in Moderate and Severe Sensorineural Hearing Loss

Speech-in-noise perception ability can be related to auditory efferent pathway function: a comparative study in reading impaired and normal reading children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About