Prediction Interval of Word Recognition Score using
Korean Standard Monosyllabic Word Lists for Adults

유병민,; 이정학,

doi:10.21848/audiol.2014.10.1.35

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the presentation level increased from 0 to 30 dB HL, means of WRSs increased both at test and retest; however, the variation of differences between WRSs at test and retest became smaller, probably because of the ceiling effect toward the extreme band of 86-100%. These results are also consistent with the previous studies [ 3 4 6 11 ]. Correlation coefficients of this study are higher and CIs are narrower than You and Lee [ 3 ] results for all test conditions, however.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…As expected, the retest reliability of WRS for 10 test words was low, compared to the 25 and 50 test words. Previous studies [ 3 12 ] also reported that correlation became higher and SD was getting smaller and the CI was getting narrower as the number of test words increased in WRS testing. Both this study and aforementioned researches would recommend 25 or more test words for obtaining a reliable WRS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…In the clinical settings, WRS gives valuable information to see how much improvement occurred for each individual at the end of treatment, hearing aid fitting, aural rehabilitation, etc. [ 3 4 5 ]. We would not be sure whether the improvement is significant or not, however, if test-retest reliability is not established, which refers to the repeatability of a measure [ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is well known that parameters affecting WRS include a number of test words, stimulus presentation level and mode, difficulty level of word lists, etc. Although few studies [ 1 3 12 13 ] examined test-retest reliability of Korean WRS for adults, their data were not enough to clearly interpret retest results of the KS-MWL-A with respect to aforementioned parameters, because of differences between old and newly developed word lists, small number of subjects, skewed distribution of WRSs, or homogeneity problem in age.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indices to show test-retest results include correlation, confidence interval (CI), and prediction interval (PI) in this study. The CI can be described as an estimate of the interval in which the sample mean represents the population mean and the PI as an estimate of the interval in which the retest results will fall with a certain probability, given the results at the previous test [ 3 8 9 ]. The PI is useful for making inferences whether the degree of change in WRS at the retest is significant or not for each individual.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Test-Retest Reliability of Word Recognition Score Using Korean Standard Monosyllabic Word Lists for Adults as a Function of the Number of Test Words

Kim

Lee

et al. 2015

J Audiol Otol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and ObjectivesThe purpose was to establish the test-retest reliability of word recognition score (WRS) using Korean standard monosyllabic word lists for adults (KS-MWL-A) recently developed based on the international standard for speech audiometry (ISO 8253-3:2012).Subjects and MethodsSubjects consisted of 159 adults aged to 18 to 25 years with normal hearing sensitivity. WRSs were obtained in 2 dB steps from the level of speech recognition thresholds to the level of 86% correct responses or greater. After one or two weeks, retest was performed. Correlation, confidence interval (CI) and prediction interval (PI) were calculated for the reliability.ResultsCorrelation coefficients were 0.88 for 50 test words, 0.76 for 25 and 0.61 for 10 words. Results also showed that 95% CIs and PIs were narrower for 25 and 50 test words than those for 10 test words.ConclusionsKorean WRS using the KS-MWL-A has high reliability for 25 and 50 test words, but relatively low for 10 words. It suggested that 95% CIs for each test words would be criteria for significant differences in WRS for groups and 95% PIs at each score of WRS could be utilized for a considerable difference for each individual at retest.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Test-Retest Reliability of Word Recognition Score Using Korean Standard Monosyllabic Word Lists for Adults as a Function of the Number of Test Words

Kim

Lee

et al. 2015

J Audiol Otol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Clinical Importance of Sound-Field Speech Recognition Test for Measurement of Hearing Aid Benefit

Ko¹,

Lee²

2021

Korean J Otorhinolaryngol-Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives Although sound-field speech recognition test is an essential evaluation method to verify the benefit of hearing aids, the aided sound-field speech recognition test has not been used as a standard audiometric protocol. This study investigated whether a traditional measure of unaided speech recognition measured at an individual’s most comfortable level (MCL) can predict aided speech recognition performance and the benefit of hearing aids.Subjects and Method One hundred twenty-one ears (72 adult hearing aid users) with moderate, moderately severe, and severe degrees of hearing loss were tested. The word recognition score (WRS) and sentence recognition score (SRS) were measured at MCLs using earphones (earphone WRS and earphone SRS). From the sound-field speech audiometry, both unaided and aided WRS and SRS were evaluated at an average conversational speech level (at 65 dB SPL) using a loudspeaker (located at 0° azimuth, 1 m). This study determined the differences between earphone scores (at MCL) and aided recognition scores (at 65 dB SPL), which is known as earphone to aided difference (EAD). Also, the hearing aid benefit was simply derived by differences between the unaided and aided scores, both measured at 65 dB SPL.Results The differences between the unaided and aided scores were significantly lower with a higher degree of hearing loss, yet the earphone scores measured at MCLs did not differ across varied hearing loss. More than half of the tested ears had the EAD of greater than ±10%. The ears with a higher degree of hearing loss tended to have +EAD (earphone score>aided score), whereas the ears with less hearing loss showed -EAD (earphone score≤aided score). The earphone score measured at MCLs was not a predominant contributor to predict either aided performance or hearing aid benefit.Conclusion Clinicians should not assume that the unaided speech recognition score measured with earphones at MCL can accurately predict aided speech recognition or the benefit of hearing aids. Instead, it is crucial to directly assess aided sound-field speech recognition performance at a conversational speech level.

show abstract

Prediction Interval of Word Recognition Score using Korean Standard Monosyllabic Word Lists for Adults

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Test-Retest Reliability of Word Recognition Score Using Korean Standard Monosyllabic Word Lists for Adults as a Function of the Number of Test Words

Test-Retest Reliability of Word Recognition Score Using Korean Standard Monosyllabic Word Lists for Adults as a Function of the Number of Test Words

Clinical Importance of Sound-Field Speech Recognition Test for Measurement of Hearing Aid Benefit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About