Shehabi Adnan, Plack Christopher J, Prendergast Garreth, Munro Kevin J, Stone Michael A, Laycock Joseph, AlJasser Arwa, Guest Hannah
Department of Audiology and Speech Therapy, Birzeit University, West Bank, Palestine.
Manchester Centre for Audiology and Deafness, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, United Kingdom.
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2025 Jan 2;68(1):388-398. doi: 10.1044/2024_JSLHR-24-00085. Epub 2024 Dec 12.
The Digits-in-Noise (DIN) test is used widely in research and, increasingly, in remote hearing screening. The reported study aimed to provide basic evaluation data for browser-based DIN software, which allows remote testing without installation of an app. It investigated the effects of test language (Arabic vs. English) and test environment (lab vs. home) on DIN thresholds and test-retest reliability. It also examined the effects of test language on the correlations between DIN and audiometric thresholds.
Fifty-two bilingual adults with normal hearing aged 18-35 years completed Arabic and English diotic DIN tests (two sessions in the lab and two sessions at home via the web). Effects of language and environment on DIN thresholds were assessed via paired tests, while intraclass and Pearson's/Spearman's correlation coefficients quantified test-retest reliability and relations to audiometric thresholds.
DIN thresholds were 0.74 dB higher (worse) for Arabic than English stimuli. Thresholds were 0.52 dB lower in the lab than at home, but the effect was not significant after correction for multiple comparisons. Intraclass and Pearson's correlation coefficients were too low for meaningful analysis due to the use of a normal-hearing sample with low between-subject variability in DIN and audiometric thresholds. However, exploratory analysis showed that absolute test-retest differences were low (< 1.2 dB, on average) for both languages and both test environments.
Arabic DIN thresholds were a little higher than English thresholds for the same listeners. Employing home-based rather than lab-based testing may slightly elevate DIN thresholds, but the effect was marginal. Nonetheless, both factors should be considered when interpreting DIN data. Test-retest differences were low for both languages and environments. To support hearing screening, subsequent research in audiometrically diverse listeners is required, testing the reliability of DIN thresholds and relations to hearing loss.
数字噪声测试(DIN)在研究中被广泛使用,并且越来越多地用于远程听力筛查。本报告的研究旨在为基于浏览器的DIN软件提供基础评估数据,该软件可实现无需安装应用程序的远程测试。研究调查了测试语言(阿拉伯语与英语)和测试环境(实验室与家庭)对DIN阈值及重测信度的影响。还研究了测试语言对DIN与听力阈值之间相关性的影响。
52名年龄在18至35岁之间、听力正常的双语成年人完成了阿拉伯语和英语的双耳DIN测试(在实验室进行两次测试,通过网络在家中进行两次测试)。通过配对检验评估语言和环境对DIN阈值的影响,而组内相关系数以及皮尔逊/斯皮尔曼相关系数则用于量化重测信度以及与听力阈值的关系。
阿拉伯语刺激的DIN阈值比英语刺激高0.74 dB(更差)。实验室中的阈值比家中低0.52 dB,但在进行多重比较校正后,该效应并不显著。由于使用的是听力正常的样本,其DIN和听力阈值的受试者间变异性较低,因此组内相关系数和皮尔逊相关系数过低,无法进行有意义的分析。然而,探索性分析表明,两种语言和两种测试环境的绝对重测差异均较低(平均<1.2 dB)。
对于相同的受试者,阿拉伯语DIN阈值比英语阈值略高。采用在家测试而非在实验室测试可能会使DIN阈值略有升高,但影响很小。尽管如此,在解释DIN数据时应考虑这两个因素。两种语言和环境下的重测差异均较低。为支持听力筛查,需要对听力情况各异的受试者进行后续研究,测试DIN阈值的可靠性及其与听力损失的关系。