• 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

基于听力状况,通过噪声中数字测试来区分听觉表现程度。

Discrimination of degrees of auditory performance from the digits-in-noise test based on hearing status.

作者信息

Armstrong Nicole M, Oosterloo Berthe C, Croll Pauline H, Ikram Mohammad Arfan, Goedegebure André

机构信息

Laboratory of Behavioral Neuroscience, National Institute on Aging, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Int J Audiol. 2020 Dec;59(12):897-904. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2020.1787531. Epub 2020 Jul 16.

DOI:10.1080/14992027.2020.1787531
PMID:32673129
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To discriminate among degrees of auditory performance of the Digits-in-Noise (DIN) test.

DESIGN

We performed Pearson's correlations and age- and sex-adjusted linear regression models to examine the correlation between pure-tone average (PTA) from pure-tone audiometric tests and speech recognition thresholds (SRT) from the DIN test. Then, optimal SRT cut-points by PTA-defined hearing status (0-25 dB HL [normal], 26-40 dB HL [mild hearing loss], 41-50 dB HL [moderate hearing loss]) were compared across three methods: Youden, Nearest, and Liu. SRT-defined categories of auditory performance were compared to PTA-defined hearing categories to examine the convergence of similar categories. 3422 Rotterdam Study participants aged 51-98 years between 2011 and 2014.

RESULTS

The correlation between SRT and PTA was 0.65 (95% Confidence Interval: 0.63, 0.67) in the overall sample. The variability of SRT explained by PTA after age and sex adjustment was 54%. Optimal cut-points for the overall sample across the three methods were: ≤ -5.55 dB SNR (normal); > -5.55 to ≤ -3.80 dB SNR (insufficient performance); > -3.80 dB SNR (poor performance). When comparing the SRT- or PTA-defined categories, 59.8% had concordant hearing categories and 40.2% had discordant hearing categories.

CONCLUSIONS

Discrimination of degrees of auditory performance may add greater utility of the DIN test.

摘要

目的

区分噪声中数字(DIN)测试的不同听觉表现程度。

设计

我们进行了Pearson相关性分析以及年龄和性别调整后的线性回归模型,以检验纯音听力测试中的纯音平均听阈(PTA)与DIN测试中的言语识别阈(SRT)之间的相关性。然后,通过三种方法(约登法、最近邻法和刘法)比较了按PTA定义的听力状况(0 - 25 dB HL[正常]、26 - 40 dB HL[轻度听力损失]、41 - 50 dB HL[中度听力损失])确定的最佳SRT切点。将SRT定义的听觉表现类别与PTA定义的听力类别进行比较,以检验相似类别的一致性。研究对象为2011年至2014年间年龄在51 - 98岁的3422名鹿特丹研究参与者。

结果

在总体样本中,SRT与PTA的相关性为0.65(95%置信区间:0.63,0.67)。年龄和性别调整后,PTA解释的SRT变异性为54%。三种方法在总体样本中的最佳切点为:≤ -5.55 dB SNR(正常);> -5.55至≤ -3.80 dB SNR(表现不足);> -3.80 dB SNR(表现差)。比较SRT或PTA定义的类别时,59.8%的听力类别一致,40.2%的听力类别不一致。

结论

区分听觉表现程度可能会增加DIN测试的实用性。

相似文献

1
Discrimination of degrees of auditory performance from the digits-in-noise test based on hearing status.基于听力状况,通过噪声中数字测试来区分听觉表现程度。
Int J Audiol. 2020 Dec;59(12):897-904. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2020.1787531. Epub 2020 Jul 16.
2
Evaluating a smartphone digits-in-noise test as part of the audiometric test battery.评估智能手机噪声中数字测试作为听力测试组的一部分。
S Afr J Commun Disord. 2018 May 21;65(1):e1-e6. doi: 10.4102/sajcd.v65i1.574.
3
[Hearing Loss and Speech Recognition in the Elderly].[老年人的听力损失与言语识别]
Laryngorhinootologie. 2017 Nov;96(11):759-764. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-119388. Epub 2017 Nov 13.
4
Improving Sensitivity of the Digits-In-Noise Test Using Antiphasic Stimuli.使用反相刺激提高数字噪声测试的灵敏度
Ear Hear. 2020 Mar/Apr;41(2):442-450. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000775.
5
Predicting Matrix Test Effectiveness for Evaluating Auditory Performance in Noise Using Pure-Tone Audiometry and Speech Recognition in Quiet in Cochlear Implant Recipients.使用纯音听力测定法和安静环境下的言语识别来预测人工耳蜗植入受者在噪声中评估听觉表现的矩阵测试有效性。
Audiol Neurootol. 2024;29(5):408-417. doi: 10.1159/000535622. Epub 2024 Apr 10.
6
Minimal and Mild Hearing Loss in Children: Association with Auditory Perception, Cognition, and Communication Problems.儿童轻度和极轻度听力损失:与听觉感知、认知和交流问题的关联。
Ear Hear. 2020 Jul/Aug;41(4):720-732. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000802.
7
Pure-tone audiometry without bone-conduction thresholds: using the digits-in-noise test to detect conductive hearing loss.纯音测听而不测试骨导阈值:使用噪声中的数字测试来检测传导性听力损失。
Int J Audiol. 2020 Oct;59(10):801-808. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2020.1783585. Epub 2020 Jul 1.
8
Validation of a Computer-Administered Version of the Digits-in-Noise Test for Hearing Screening in the United States.美国用于听力筛查的计算机化噪声中数字测试版本的验证
J Am Acad Audiol. 2017 Feb;28(2):161-169. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.16038.
9
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.
10
Digits in noise testing in a multilingual sample of Asian adults.噪声测试中亚洲成年人多语言样本中的数字。
Int J Audiol. 2024 Apr;63(4):269-274. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2023.2179549. Epub 2023 Feb 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Speech-in-noise testing: Innovative applications for pediatric patients, underrepresented populations, fitness for duty, clinical trials, and remote services.语音噪声测试:儿科患者、代表性不足人群、适航性、临床试验和远程服务的创新应用。
J Acoust Soc Am. 2022 Oct;152(4):2336. doi: 10.1121/10.0014418.
2
Accuracy of smartphone-based hearing screening tests: a systematic review.基于智能手机的听力筛查测试的准确性:系统评价。
Codas. 2022 Feb 23;34(3):e20200380. doi: 10.1590/2317-1782/20212020380. eCollection 2022.
3
Personality captures dissociations of subjective versus objective hearing in noise.
人格特征揭示了噪声环境中主观听力与客观听力的分离。
R Soc Open Sci. 2021 Nov 10;8(11):210881. doi: 10.1098/rsos.210881. eCollection 2021 Nov.