Use of 35 words for evaluation of hearing loss in signal-to-babble ratio: A clinic protocol

Wilson, Richard H.; Burks, Christopher A.

doi:10.1682/jrrd.2005.01.0009

Cited by 77 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…6 (Tillman & Carhart, 1966;Department of Veterans Affairs, 2006) that were reproduced by a compact disc player (Sony, Model CDP-437) routed through the audiometer (GrasonStadler, Models 61). Typically, the word lists were administered at two levels, 24 dB apart (range 60Á94 dB HL; Wilson & Burks, 2005). The better word-recognition performance was recorded for each ear.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a hearing aid self-efficacy questionnaire

West

Smith

2007

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discontinued hearing-aid use is caused by a number of factors, most of which may lead to low hearing-aid self-efficacy (i.e. low confidence in one's ability to B a successful hearing-aid user). This paper describes the development of the Measure of Audiologic Rehabilitation Self-Efficacy for Hearing Aids (MARS-HA), which was constructed in accordance with published recommendations for self-efficacy questionnaire development. The psychometric properties of the MARS-HA were evaluated with new and experienced hearing-aid users. The results revealed strong internal consistency and good test-retest reliability in both groups, with the following subscales identified both for the new users and the experienced users: (1) basic handling, (2) advanced handling, (3) adjustment to hearing aids, and (4) aided listening skills. Validity was established through the examination of expected differences based on group comparisons, training effects, and the impact of particular hearing aid features. The MARS-HA is a reliable and valid measure of hearing-aid self-efficacy and can be used to assist clinicians in identifying areas of low confidence that require additional audiologic training.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a hearing aid self-efficacy questionnaire

West

Smith

2007

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Words-in-Noise (WIN; Wilson, Abrams, & Pillion, 2003;Wilson & Burks, 2005) test was used to determine the threshold for word recognition in noise. In this test, five words are presented in each of seven signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) conditions; the level of the speech is reduced so that the SNR conditions become progressively more difficult (from 24 to 0 dB SNR in 4 dB decrements).…”

Section: Winmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of hearing and vision impairments on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment

Dupuis

Pichora-Fuller

Chasteen

et al. 2014

Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

235

253

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many standardized measures of cognition include items that must be seen or heard. Nevertheless, it is not uncommon to overlook the possible effects of sensory impairment(s) on test scores. In the current study, we investigated whether sensory impairments could affect performance on a widely used screening tool, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Three hundred and one older adults (mean age = 71 years) completed the MoCA and also hearing and vision tests. Half of the participants had normal hearing and vision, 38% impaired hearing, 5% impaired vision, and 7% had dual-sensory impairment. More participants with normal sensory acuity passed the MoCA compared to those with sensory loss, even after modifying scores to adjust for sensory factors. The results suggest that cognitive abilities may be underestimated if sensory problems are not considered and that people with sensory loss are at greater risk of cognitive decline.

show abstract

“…Traditionally, the ability to recognize speech in noise is tested with nonsense syllables, monosyllabic words (Wilson, 2003;Wilson & Burks, 2005), or sentences (Kalikow et al, 1977;Plomp & Mimpen, 1979;Bench et al, 1979;Nilsson et al, 1994;Killion et al, 2004). The use of redundant sentences as speech material is often advocated for its high face validity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison between the Dutch and American-English digits-in-noise (DIN) tests in normal-hearing listeners

Smits

Watson

Kidd

et al. 2016

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The Dutch digits-in-noise test (NL DIN) and the American-English version (US DIN) are speech-in-noise tests for diagnostic and clinical usage. The present study investigated differences between NL DIN and US DIN speech reception thresholds (SRTs) for a group of native Dutch-speaking listeners. Design: In experiment 1, a repeated-measures design was used to compare SRTs for the NL DIN and US DIN in steady-state noise and interrupted noise for monaural, diotic, and dichotic listening conditions. In experiment 2, a subset of these conditions with additional speech material (i.e. US DIN triplets without inter-digit coarticulation/prosody) was used. Study sample: Experiment 1 was conducted with 16 normal-hearing Dutch students. Experiment 2 was conducted with nine different students. Results: No significant differences between SRTs measured with the NL DIN and US DIN were found in steady-state noise. In interrupted noise the US DIN SRTs were significantly better in monaural and diotic listening conditions. Experiment 2 demonstrated that these better SRTs cannot be explained by the combined effect of inter-digit coarticulation and prosody in the American-English triplets. Conclusions: The NL DIN and US DIN are highly comparable and valuable tests for measuring auditory speech recognition abilities. These tests promote acrosslanguage comparisons of results.

show abstract

Use of 35 words for evaluation of hearing loss in signal-to-babble ratio: A clinic protocol

Cited by 77 publications

References 36 publications

Development of a hearing aid self-efficacy questionnaire

Development of a hearing aid self-efficacy questionnaire

Effects of hearing and vision impairments on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment

A comparison between the Dutch and American-English digits-in-noise (DIN) tests in normal-hearing listeners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About