2015
DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.14108
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Characteristics of Pediatric Performance on a Test Battery Commonly Used in the Diagnosis of Central Auditory Processing Disorder

Abstract: The two-test combination that showed the highest failure rate for children with CAPD was LPFS-FP. Comparison with adults with CANS lesions, however, suggests that the mechanisms underlying LPFS performance in children need to be better understood. The two-test combination that showed the next highest failure rates among children with CAPD and did not include LPFS was CS-FP. If it is desirable to use a dichotic measure that has a lower linguistic load than CS then DD can be substituted for CS despite the slight… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
27
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
3
27
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This suggests the face validity of the SinB as a measure of central auditory processing that is not significantly influenced by language or cognitive deficits. This is in accordance with Weihing et al (2015) who reported that (a) there was no significant correlation between a test of low-pass filtered speech and intelligence quotient scores when children had a score of $80 on Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV test and (b) the low-pass filtered speech test used demonstrated 82% efficiency in identifying CAPD in children. Even though the speech recognition in noise test used in the present study is not a low-pass filtered speech recognition test, both types of tests are included in the general category of monaural low-redundancy speech tests to assess functional hearing.…”
Section: Is Sinb Influenced By Comorbid Disorders?supporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This suggests the face validity of the SinB as a measure of central auditory processing that is not significantly influenced by language or cognitive deficits. This is in accordance with Weihing et al (2015) who reported that (a) there was no significant correlation between a test of low-pass filtered speech and intelligence quotient scores when children had a score of $80 on Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV test and (b) the low-pass filtered speech test used demonstrated 82% efficiency in identifying CAPD in children. Even though the speech recognition in noise test used in the present study is not a low-pass filtered speech recognition test, both types of tests are included in the general category of monaural low-redundancy speech tests to assess functional hearing.…”
Section: Is Sinb Influenced By Comorbid Disorders?supporting
confidence: 90%
“…The fact that this was evident for both control and CAPD groups, but with a different slope for each group, taps into the efficiency of SinB to differentiate children based on their central auditory processing skills. A recent study by Weihing et al (2015) showed that the two-test combination with the best sensitivity to detect CAPD in children includes a low-pass filtered speech (Willeford, 1976) and a FPT (Musiek and Pinheiro, 1987). As the inclusion of children ,7 yr in CAPD studies is unconventional, further analysis of our data was deemed necessary.…”
Section: Sinb Shows a Constant Slope Of Improvementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, other aspects of binaural interaction, including sound localization (Blauert, 1997) and binaural (Moore etn al., 1991; Pillsbury, Grose, & Hall, 1991) or spatial (Cameron & Dillon, 2007) release from masking have received substantial attention as contributors to LiD in adults and in children. Many other aspects of hearing and listening have also been studied in children with LiD (de Wit et al, 2016; Moore et al, 2010; Weihing et al, 2015; Wilson, 2018) leading, overall, to the emergence of two dominant hypotheses concerning the nature of the problem experienced by these children. The first, and more traditional hypothesis is that a disorder, central (C)APD, is primarily a result of impaired processing of auditory neural signals in the central auditory system, defined as the brain pathway from the auditory nerve to the auditory cortex (Rees & Palmer, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These concomitant problems make the diagnosis of APD more difficult. In normal hearing patients, APD can be diagnosed using screening tests including competing words, competing sentences, dichotic listening, speech understanding in noise, filtered speech, and phonemic synthesis (Skarzynski et al, 2015; Weihing et al, 2015). More recently, speech-evoked auditory brainstem responses (Kopp-Scheinpflug and Tempel, 2015; Rocha-Muniz et al, 2016) and mismatch negativity (MMN) (Rocha-Muniz et al, 2015) have been proposed to objectively detect APD.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%