Ahmmed Ansar U, Ahmmed Afsara A
Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Preston, UK.
Newcastle University, UK.
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2016 May;84:166-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2016.03.014. Epub 2016 Mar 19.
This paper explores the pass or fail cut-off criteria, the number of test fails, and the nature of tests that are most appropriate in predicting listening difficulties (LiD) in children with suspected APD (SusAPD).
One hundred and nine English-speaking children (67 males, 42 females) aged between 6 and 11 years with SusAPD were assessed. The Children's Auditory Performance Scale (CHAPS) scores 2 SD below the mean were taken as markers of LiD in different listening conditions. Binary logistic regression analyses were carried out to evaluate the cut-off criterion (2 SD or 1.5 SD or 1 SD below the mean) of failing at least two tests, from the SCAN-C and IMAP test batteries, which significantly predicted LiD. Analyses were also carried out to assess if the group of auditory processing (AP) or cognitive or combination of AP plus cognitive tests were significant in predicting LiD. Receiver Operative Characteristic (ROC) curves were also explored to evaluate how the sensitivity and specificity in confirming LiD varied with the number of test fails.
Filtered Words, Competing Words, Competing Sentences, VCV in ICRA noise, Digit Span, Sight Word Reading and the Cued Auditory Attention tests correlated with one or more of the CHAPS domains. Failing at least two of these tests 1.5 SD below the mean significantly predicted (p<.05) CHAPS Ideal scores 2 SD below the mean, and failing at least two of the tests 1 SD below the mean significantly predicted (p<.05) CHAPS Memory and CHAPS Attention scores 2 SD below the mean. The combination of AP plus cognitive tests had significantly higher ability to predict CHAPS Ideal, Memory and Attention scores, compared to the group of AP or cognitive tests separately. ROC curves showed that failing at least two of the tests was associated with the best sensitivity and specificity in predicting LiD.
Of the different CHAPS domains only the CHAPS Ideal, Memory and Attention correlated with the APD tests. Failing at least two APD tests from a combination of AP and cognitive tests 1 SD and 1.5 SD below the mean, but not 2 SD, is more appropriate in confirming LiD.
本文探讨了及格或不及格的 cutoff 标准、测试不及格的数量以及在预测疑似听觉处理障碍（SusAPD）儿童的听力困难（LiD）方面最合适的测试性质。
对 109 名年龄在 6 至 11 岁之间、患有 SusAPD 的说英语儿童（67 名男性，42 名女性）进行了评估。将儿童听觉表现量表（CHAPS）得分低于平均值 2 个标准差作为不同听力条件下 LiD 的指标。进行二元逻辑回归分析，以评估来自 SCAN - C 和 IMAP 测试组中至少两项测试不及格的 cutoff 标准（低于平均值 2 个标准差或 1.5 个标准差或 1 个标准差），这些标准能显著预测 LiD。还进行了分析，以评估听觉处理（AP）测试组、认知测试组或 AP 加认知测试的组合在预测 LiD 方面是否具有显著性。还探索了受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线，以评估确认 LiD 时的敏感性和特异性如何随测试不及格的数量而变化。
过滤词、竞争词、竞争句子、ICRA 噪声中的 VCV、数字广度、视读单词和提示听觉注意力测试与 CHAPS 的一个或多个领域相关。低于平均值 1.5 个标准差的这些测试中至少两项不及格显著预测（p <.05）CHAPS 理想得分低于平均值 2 个标准差，低于平均值 1 个标准差的这些测试中至少两项不及格显著预测（p <.05）CHAPS 记忆和 CHAPS 注意力得分低于平均值 2 个标准差。与单独的 AP 测试组或认知测试组相比，AP 加认知测试的组合在预测 CHAPS 理想、记忆和注意力得分方面具有显著更高的能力。ROC 曲线表明，至少两项测试不及格与预测 LiD 时的最佳敏感性和特异性相关。
在不同的 CHAPS 领域中，只有 CHAPS 理想、记忆和注意力与 APD 测试相关。低于平均值 1 个标准差和 1.5 个标准差（而非 2 个标准差）的 AP 和认知测试组合中至少两项 APD 测试不及格，在确认 LiD 方面更合适。
