Suppr超能文献

[使用光盘和盒式磁带进行的比较言语听力测定检查]

[Comparative speech audiometry examinations with compact disk and cassette tape].

作者信息

Doerr L

机构信息

Klinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Krankheiten, Kopf- und Hals-Chirurgie, Ruhr-Universität Bochum.

出版信息

HNO. 1994 Aug;42(8):493-8.

PMID:7960952
Abstract

We compared the results of speech audiometry, performed with recorded tape and compact disc recordings (CD), respectively, in 21 subjects with bone-conduction hearing losses CHL and 27 subjects with sensorineural hearing losses. In all cases, speech audiometry was performed by using the 1969 Freiburg speech test material based on the German DIN standard 45626. In subjects with air-bone gaps, the hearing loss for speech was 2.3 dB smaller if tested by use of CD and speech recognition was 10.5 points better. Smaller differences could be found in sensorineural HL. For CD, hearing losses were 1.2 dB smaller and speech recognition scores were increased by only 1 point. These differences were not statistically significant. These findings show that calculations of hearing impairments and individual hearing handicaps from tables commonly used in Germany in medicolegal expert evaluations should not be changed if CD records are used that are based on 1969 DIN 4526 recordings. However, the handling of compact discs has many advantages in relation to the handling of tapes.

摘要

我们分别比较了21例骨导听力损失(CHL)患者和27例感音神经性听力损失患者使用录音带和光盘(CD)进行言语测听的结果。在所有情况下,言语测听均采用基于德国DIN标准45626的1969年弗莱堡言语测试材料。在存在气骨导间距的受试者中,使用CD进行测试时,言语听力损失小2.3dB,言语识别率高10.5分。在感音神经性听力损失中发现的差异较小。对于CD,听力损失小1.2dB,言语识别分数仅提高1分。这些差异无统计学意义。这些发现表明,如果使用基于1969年DIN 4526录音的CD记录,在德国法医学专家评估中常用表格计算听力障碍和个体听力残疾的方法不应改变。然而,与磁带处理相比,光盘处理有许多优点。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验