• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

关于自我报告作为听力学参考标准的一种观点。

An Argument for Self-Report as a Reference Standard in Audiology.

作者信息

Vermiglio Andrew J, Soli Sigfrid D, Fang Xiangming

机构信息

Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC.

House Clinic, Los Angeles, CA.

出版信息

J Am Acad Audiol. 2018 Mar;29(3):206-222. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.16128.

DOI:10.3766/jaaa.16128
PMID:29488871
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The primary components of a diagnostic accuracy study are an index test, the target condition (or disorder), and a reference standard. According to the Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy statement, the reference standard should be the best method available to independently determine if the results of an index test are correct. Pure-tone thresholds have been used as the "gold standard" for the validation of some tests used in audiology. Many studies, however, have shown a lack of agreement between the audiogram and the patient's perception of hearing ability. For example, patients with normal audiograms may report difficulty understanding speech in the presence of background noise.

PURPOSE

The primary purpose of this article is to present an argument for the use of self-report as a reference standard for diagnostic studies in the field of audiology. This will be in the form of a literature review on pure-tone threshold measures and self-report as reference standards. The secondary purpose is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of pure-tone threshold and Hearing-in-Noise Test (HINT) measures for the detection of a speech-recognition-in-noise disorder.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Two groups of participants with normal pure-tone thresholds were evaluated. The King-Kopetzky syndrome (KKS) group was made up of participants with the self-report of speech-recognition-in-noise difficulties. The control group was made up of participants with no reports of speech-recognition-in-noise problems. The reference standard was self-report. Diagnostic accuracy of HINT and pure-tone threshold measures was determined by measuring group differences, sensitivity and specificity, and the area under the curve (AUC) for receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

STUDY SAMPLE

Forty-seven participants were tested. All participants were native speakers of American English. Twenty-two participants were in the control group and 25 in the KKS group. The groups were matched for age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pure-tone threshold data were collected using the Hughson-Westlake procedure. Speech-recognition-in-noise data was collected using a software system and the standard HINT protocol. Statistical analyses were conducted using descriptive, correlational, two-sample t tests, and logistic regression.

RESULTS

The literature review revealed that self-report has been used as a reference standard in investigations of patients with normal audiograms and the perception of difficulty understanding speech in the presence of background noise. Self-report may be a better indicator of hearing ability than pure-tone thresholds in some situations. The diagnostic accuracy investigation revealed statistically significant differences between control and KKS groups for HINT performance (p < 0.01), but not for pure-tone threshold measures. Better sensitivity was found for the HINT Composite score (88%) than pure-tone average (PTA; 28%). The specificities for the HINT Composite score and PTA were 77% and 95%, respectively. ROC curves revealed a greater AUC for the HINT Composite score (AUC = 0.87) than for PTA (AUC = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

Self-report is a reasonable reference standard for studies on the diagnostic accuracy of speech-recognition-in-noise tests. For individuals with normal pure-tone thresholds, the HINT demonstrated a higher degree of diagnostic accuracy than pure-tone thresholds for the detection of speech-recognition-in-noise disorder.

摘要

背景

诊断准确性研究的主要组成部分包括一项指标测试、目标病症(或疾病)以及一项参考标准。根据《诊断准确性报告标准》声明,参考标准应是可独立判定指标测试结果是否正确的最佳可用方法。纯音阈值已被用作听力学中某些测试验证的“金标准”。然而,许多研究表明听力图与患者对听力能力的感知之间缺乏一致性。例如,听力图正常的患者可能会报告在有背景噪音的情况下理解言语有困难。

目的

本文的主要目的是论证将自我报告用作听力学领域诊断研究的参考标准。这将以关于纯音阈值测量和自我报告作为参考标准的文献综述形式呈现。次要目的是确定纯音阈值和噪声中听力测试(HINT)测量对于检测噪声中言语识别障碍的诊断准确性。

研究设计

对两组纯音阈值正常的参与者进行评估。金 - 科佩茨基综合征(KKS)组由自我报告有噪声中言语识别困难的参与者组成。对照组由无噪声中言语识别问题报告的参与者组成。参考标准为自我报告。通过测量组间差异、敏感性和特异性以及用于接收器操作特征(ROC)曲线的曲线下面积(AUC)来确定HINT和纯音阈值测量的诊断准确性。

研究样本

对47名参与者进行了测试。所有参与者均以美式英语为母语。22名参与者在对照组,25名在KKS组。两组在年龄上匹配。

数据收集与分析

使用休森 - 韦斯特莱克程序收集纯音阈值数据。使用软件系统和标准HINT协议收集噪声中言语识别数据。使用描述性、相关性、双样本t检验和逻辑回归进行统计分析。

结果

文献综述表明,自我报告已被用作听力图正常且在有背景噪音时理解言语有困难的患者调查中的参考标准。在某些情况下,自我报告可能比纯音阈值更能反映听力能力。诊断准确性调查显示,对照组和KKS组在HINT表现方面存在统计学显著差异(p < 0.01),但在纯音阈值测量方面无差异。发现HINT综合评分(88%)的敏感性高于纯音平均(PTA;28%)。HINT综合评分和PTA的特异性分别为77%和95%。ROC曲线显示HINT综合评分(AUC = 0.87)的AUC大于PTA(AUC = 0.51)。

结论

自我报告是关于噪声中言语识别测试诊断准确性研究的合理参考标准。对于纯音阈值正常的个体,在检测噪声中言语识别障碍方面,HINT显示出比纯音阈值更高的诊断准确性。

相似文献

1
An Argument for Self-Report as a Reference Standard in Audiology.关于自我报告作为听力学参考标准的一种观点。
J Am Acad Audiol. 2018 Mar;29(3):206-222. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.16128.
2
The relationship between high-frequency pure-tone hearing loss, hearing in noise test (HINT) thresholds, and the articulation index.高频纯音听力损失、噪声环境下听力测试(HINT)阈值与清晰度指数之间的关系。
J Am Acad Audiol. 2012 Nov-Dec;23(10):779-88. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.23.10.4.
3
Sentence Recognition in Steady-State Speech-Shaped Noise versus Four-Talker Babble.稳态言语塑造噪声与四说话者嘈杂声中的句子识别
J Am Acad Audiol. 2019 Jan;30(1):54-65. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.17083. Epub 2018 Jan 2.
4
Clinical experience with the words-in-noise test on 3430 veterans: comparisons with pure-tone thresholds and word recognition in quiet.3430名退伍军人的噪声中言语测试临床经验:与纯音阈值及安静环境下言语识别的比较
J Am Acad Audiol. 2011 Jul-Aug;22(7):405-23. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.22.7.3.
5
An Evaluation of the World Health Organization and American Medical Association Ratings of Hearing Impairment and Simulated Single-Sided Deafness.世界卫生组织与美国医学协会对听力障碍及模拟单侧耳聋评级的评估
J Am Acad Audiol. 2018 Jul/Aug;29(7):634-647. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.17034.
6
The Relationship between Random Gap Detection and Hearing in Noise Test Performances.随机间隙检测与噪声环境下听力测试表现之间的关系
J Am Acad Audiol. 2018 Nov/Dec;29(10):948-954. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.18005.
7
The Effect of Stimulus Audibility on the Relationship between Pure-Tone Average and Speech Recognition in Noise Ability.刺激可听度对纯音平均听力和噪声中言语识别能力关系的影响。
J Am Acad Audiol. 2020 Mar;31(3):224-232. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.19031. Epub 2019 Jul 2.
8
Diagnostic Accuracy of the AzBio Speech Recognition in Noise Test.AzBio 语音识别噪声测试的诊断准确性。
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021 Aug 9;64(8):3303-3316. doi: 10.1044/2021_JSLHR-20-00453. Epub 2021 Jul 8.
9
Understanding excessive SNR loss in hearing-impaired listeners.理解听力受损听众中过度的信噪比损失。
J Am Acad Audiol. 2013 Apr;24(4):258-73; quiz 337-8. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.24.4.3.
10
Speech-in-Noise Test results of compensation claimants for noise induced hearing loss in Korean male workers: Words-in-Noise Test (WIN) and quick-Hearing-in-Noise Test (HINT).韩国男性工人噪声性听力损失赔偿 claimants 的噪声中言语测试结果:噪声中言语测试(WIN)和快速噪声中听力测试(HINT)。 (注:这里“claimants”可能有更准确的法律术语表述,比如“索赔者”等,需结合具体语境确定更精准译法)
Ann Occup Environ Med. 2021 Apr 20;33:e11. doi: 10.35371/aoem.2021.33.e11. eCollection 2021.

引用本文的文献

1
Daily-Life Fatigue Among Adolescents Who Are Hard of Hearing: An Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.听力障碍青少年的日常生活疲劳:一项生态瞬时评估研究。
Ear Hear. 2025 Jul 30. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001705.
2
Polygenic Risk Scores and Hearing Loss Phenotypes in Children.儿童的多基因风险评分与听力损失表型
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2024 Nov 7;151(1):56-64. doi: 10.1001/jamaoto.2024.3659.
3
Hearing loss, social isolation and depression in participants aged 50 years or over in Tasmania, Australia.澳大利亚塔斯马尼亚州50岁及以上参与者的听力损失、社交孤立和抑郁情况。
Australas J Ageing. 2024 Dec;43(4):692-699. doi: 10.1111/ajag.13363. Epub 2024 Aug 26.
4
Multidisciplinary clinical assessment and interventions for childhood listening difficulty and auditory processing disorder: Relation between research findings and clinical practice.儿童听力困难和听觉处理障碍的多学科临床评估与干预:研究结果与临床实践的关系
medRxiv. 2024 Nov 30:2024.06.12.24308837. doi: 10.1101/2024.06.12.24308837.
5
Criteria for Determining Hearing Disability: A Narrative Review of Global Perspective.确定听力残疾的标准:全球视角的叙述性综述
Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2024 Jun;76(3):2919-2921. doi: 10.1007/s12070-024-04481-6. Epub 2024 Jan 23.
6
Identification of appropriate tools to gauge brain functions in a clinical setup of a developing country: A pilot study.在发展中国家的临床环境中确定评估脑功能的合适工具:一项试点研究。
Pak J Med Sci. 2023 Nov-Dec;39(6):1840-1846. doi: 10.12669/pjms.39.6.7489.
7
Preliminary Guidelines for Replacing Word-Recognition in Quiet With Speech in Noise Assessment in the Routine Audiologic Test Battery.安静环境下语音识别替代词识别测试在常规听力学测试中的初步指南
Ear Hear. 2023;44(6):1548-1561. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001409. Epub 2023 Aug 22.
8
Effect of Determinants of Health on the Hearing Care Framework: An Economic Perspective.健康决定因素对听力保健框架的影响:经济视角
Semin Hear. 2023 Jun 6;44(3):232-260. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1769611. eCollection 2023 Aug.
9
Development and validation of a Spanish-language spatial release from masking task in a Mexican population.开发并验证了一种适用于墨西哥人群的西班牙语空间释放掩蔽任务。
J Acoust Soc Am. 2023 Jan;153(1):316. doi: 10.1121/10.0016850.
10
Efficacy of Mesotympanum Injection and Posterior Auricular Injection in Sudden Hearing Loss of Diabetes Patients.中耳腔注射与耳后注射治疗糖尿病患者突发性聋的疗效比较。
Biomed Res Int. 2022 Jul 19;2022:8494868. doi: 10.1155/2022/8494868. eCollection 2022.