Literature DB >> 17252960

Qualind: A method for assessing the accuracy of automated tests.

Robert H Margolis1, George L Saly, Chap Le, Jessica Laurence.   

Abstract

As audiology strives for cost containment, standardization, accuracy of tests, and accountability, greater use of automated tests is likely. Highly skilled audiologists employ quality control factors that contribute to test accuracy, but they are not formally included in test protocols, resulting in a wide range of accuracy, owing to the various skill and experience levels of clinicians. A method that incorporates validated quality indicators may increase accuracy and enhance access to accurate hearing tests. This report describes a quality assessment method that can be applied to any test that (1) requires behavioral or physiologic responses, (2) is associated with factors that correlate with accuracy, and (3) has an available independent measure of the dimension being assessed, including tests of sensory sensitivity, cognitive function, aptitude, academic achievement, and personality. In this report the method is applied to AMTAS, an automated method for diagnostic pure-tone audiometry.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17252960     DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.18.1.7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol        ISSN: 1050-0545            Impact factor:   1.664


  9 in total

1.  Threshold measurements by self-fitting hearing aids: feasibility and challenges.

Authors:  Gitte Keidser; Harvey Dillon; Dan Zhou; Lyndal Carter
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2012-03-07

2.  Distribution characteristics of normal pure-tone thresholds.

Authors:  Robert H Margolis; Richard H Wilson; Gerald R Popelka; Robert H Eikelboom; De Wet Swanepoel; George L Saly
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 2.117

3.  Going wireless and booth-less for hearing testing in industry.

Authors:  Deanna K Meinke; Jesse A Norris; Brendan P Flynn; Odile H Clavier
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 2.117

4.  Distribution Characteristics of Air-Bone Gaps: Evidence of Bias in Manual Audiometry.

Authors:  Robert H Margolis; Richard H Wilson; Gerald R Popelka; Robert H Eikelboom; De Wet Swanepoel; George L Saly
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Home Hearing Test: Within-Subjects Threshold Variability.

Authors:  Robert H Margolis; Gene Bratt; M Patrick Feeney; Mead C Killion; George L Saly
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2018 Sep/Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

6.  Guest editorial: accessible and affordable hearing health care for adults with mild to moderate hearing loss.

Authors:  Amy Donahue; Judy R Dubno; Lucille Beck
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 7.  Digital Approaches to Automated and Machine Learning Assessments of Hearing: Scoping Review.

Authors:  Jan-Willem Wasmann; Leontien Pragt; Robert Eikelboom; De Wet Swanepoel
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-02-02       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 8.  Self-Fitting Hearing Aids: Status Quo and Future Predictions.

Authors:  Gitte Keidser; Elizabeth Convery
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 3.293

Review 9.  Automated Audiometry: A Review of the Implementation and Evaluation Methods.

Authors:  Hassan Shojaeemend; Haleh Ayatollahi
Journal:  Healthc Inform Res       Date:  2018-10-31
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.