1956
DOI: 10.1001/archotol.1956.03830070080010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of Testing Methods on Hearing Thresholds

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1957
1957
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The manual audiometry threshold determination techniques in these reports included the modified Hughson-Westlake method and some variations thereof (Corso 1956;Burns et al 1957;Hartley et al 1964;Knight 1965;Jokinen 1969;Robinson & Whittle 1973;Erlandsson et al 1979a;1979b;Ishak et al 2011) Several reports included in the systematic review indicated that automated audiometry using the method of adjustment (Békésy sweep or Békésy fixedfrequency method) generally yields lower (i.e., better) thresholds compared with manual audiometry (Burns & Hinchcliffe 1957;Knight 1965;Jokinen 1969;Maiya & Kacker 1973;Robinson & Whittle 1973;Erlandsson et al 1979aErlandsson et al , 1979bHarris 1979;Frampton & Courter 1989;Ishak et al 2011). A single report showed manual audiometry having lower thresholds than the method of adjustment technique at certain frequencies (0.25, 6, and 8 kHz).…”
Section: Methods Of Adjustmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The manual audiometry threshold determination techniques in these reports included the modified Hughson-Westlake method and some variations thereof (Corso 1956;Burns et al 1957;Hartley et al 1964;Knight 1965;Jokinen 1969;Robinson & Whittle 1973;Erlandsson et al 1979a;1979b;Ishak et al 2011) Several reports included in the systematic review indicated that automated audiometry using the method of adjustment (Békésy sweep or Békésy fixedfrequency method) generally yields lower (i.e., better) thresholds compared with manual audiometry (Burns & Hinchcliffe 1957;Knight 1965;Jokinen 1969;Maiya & Kacker 1973;Robinson & Whittle 1973;Erlandsson et al 1979aErlandsson et al , 1979bHarris 1979;Frampton & Courter 1989;Ishak et al 2011). A single report showed manual audiometry having lower thresholds than the method of adjustment technique at certain frequencies (0.25, 6, and 8 kHz).…”
Section: Methods Of Adjustmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Audiometric threshold tracking typically yields reliable thresholds that agree with thresholds obtained with standard audiometric techniques (Reger, 1952, Corso, 1956, Burns and Hinchcliff, 1957, Stream and McConnell, 1961. Pseudohypacusic patients, in contrast, show poor threshold reliability when completing the task first with a continuous tone and again with a pulsed tone (Jerger and Herer, 1961;Resnick and Burke, 1962;Peterson, 1963;Istre and Burton, 1969;Kacker, 1971), especially when the pulsed tone is on for 200 msec and off for 800 msec (Martin and Monro, 1975).…”
Section: Audiometric Threshold Trackingmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Goldiamond (1958) and Hake and Rodwan (in press) have discussed the dependence of results on the method used to determine a threshold. Corso (1956Corso ( , 1963 has reported that the method of adjustment and the method of limits produced different auditory thresholds for the same group of subjects tested under both conditions. Clearly, different methods of obtaining thresholds do produce different results.…”
Section: Methodological Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%