Literature DB >> 24658601

Development and validation of the pediatric AzBio sentence lists.

Anthony J Spahr1, Michael F Dorman, Leonid M Litvak, Sarah J Cook, Louise M Loiselle, Melissa D DeJong, Andrea Hedley-Williams, Linsey S Sunderhaus, Catherine A Hayes, René H Gifford.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to create and validate a new set of sentence lists that could be used to evaluate the speech-perception abilities of listeners with hearing loss in cases where adult materials are inappropriate due to difficulty level or content. The authors aimed to generate a large number of sentence lists with an equivalent level of difficulty for the evaluation of performance over time and across conditions.
DESIGN: The original Pediatric AzBio sentence corpus included 450 sentences recorded from one female talker. All sentences included in the corpus were successfully repeated by kindergarten and first-grade students with normal hearing. The mean intelligibility of each sentence was estimated by processing each sentence through a cochlear implant simulation and calculating the mean percent correct score achieved by 15 normal-hearing listeners. After sorting sentences by mean percent correct scores, 320 sentences were assigned to 16 lists of equivalent difficulty. List equivalency was then validated by presenting all sentence lists, in a novel random order, to adults and children with hearing loss. A final-validation stage examined single-list comparisons from adult and pediatric listeners tested in research or clinical settings.
RESULTS: The results of the simulation study allowed for the creation of 16 lists of 20 sentences. The average intelligibility of each list ranged from 78.4 to 78.7%. List equivalency was then validated, when the results of 16 adult cochlear implant users and 9 pediatric hearing aid and cochlear implant users revealed no significant differences across lists. The binomial distribution model was used to account for the inherent variability observed in the lists. This model was also used to generate 95% confidence intervals for one and two list comparisons. A retrospective analysis of 361 instances from 78 adult cochlear implant users and 48 instances from 36 pediatric cochlear implant users revealed that the 95% confidence intervals derived from the model captured 94% of all responses (385 of 409).
CONCLUSIONS: The cochlear implant simulation was shown to be an effective method for estimating the intelligibility of individual sentences for use in the evaluation of cochlear implant users. Furthermore, the method used for constructing equivalent sentence lists and estimating the inherent variability of the materials has also been validated. Thus, the AzBio Pediatric Sentence Lists are equivalent and appropriate for the assessment of speech-understanding abilities of children with hearing loss as well as adults for whom performance on AzBio sentences is near the floor.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24658601      PMCID: PMC3971099          DOI: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000000031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  7 in total

1.  Performance of subjects fit with the Advanced Bionics CII and Nucleus 3G cochlear implant devices.

Authors:  Anthony J Spahr; Michael F Dorman
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2004-05

2.  Relationship between perception of spectral ripple and speech recognition in cochlear implant and vocoder listeners.

Authors:  Leonid M Litvak; Anthony J Spahr; Aniket A Saoji; Gene Y Fridman
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Speech recognition materials and ceiling effects: considerations for cochlear implant programs.

Authors:  René H Gifford; Jon K Shallop; Anna Mary Peterson
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 1.854

4.  Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise.

Authors:  M Nilsson; S D Soli; J A Sullivan
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Speech-discrimination scores modeled as a binomial variable.

Authors:  A R Thornton; M J Raffin
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1978-09

6.  Development and validation of the AzBio sentence lists.

Authors:  Anthony J Spahr; Michael F Dorman; Leonid M Litvak; Susan Van Wie; Rene H Gifford; Philipos C Loizou; Louise M Loiselle; Tyler Oakes; Sarah Cook
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2012 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Performance-intensity functions for normal-hearing adults and children using computer-aided speech perception assessment.

Authors:  Ryan McCreery; Rindy Ito; Merry Spratford; Dawna Lewis; Brenda Hoover; Patricia G Stelmachowicz
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.570

  7 in total
  17 in total

1.  The Effects of Acoustic Bandwidth on Simulated Bimodal Benefit in Children and Adults with Normal Hearing.

Authors:  Sterling W Sheffield; Michelle Simha; Kelly N Jahn; René H Gifford
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

2.  Initial Results With Image-guided Cochlear Implant Programming in Children.

Authors:  Jack H Noble; Andrea J Hedley-Williams; Linsey Sunderhaus; Benoit M Dawant; Robert F Labadie; Stephen M Camarata; René H Gifford
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.311

3.  Experiments on Auditory-Visual Perception of Sentences by Users of Unilateral, Bimodal, and Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Julie Liss; Shuai Wang; Visar Berisha; Cimarron Ludwig; Sarah Cook Natale
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Effect of Microphone Configuration and Sound Source Location on Speech Recognition for Adult Cochlear Implant Users with Current-Generation Sound Processors.

Authors:  Robert T Dwyer; Jillian Roberts; René H Gifford
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 1.664

5.  List Equivalency of PRESTO for the Evaluation of Speech Recognition.

Authors:  Kathleen F Faulkner; Terrin N Tamati; Jaimie L Gilbert; David B Pisoni
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  The Acoustics of Word-Initial Fricatives and Their Effect on Word-Level Intelligibility in Children With Bilateral Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Patrick F Reidy; Kayla Kristensen; Matthew B Winn; Ruth Y Litovsky; Jan R Edwards
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Jan/Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Cortical Activation Patterns Correlate with Speech Understanding After Cochlear Implantation.

Authors:  Cristen Olds; Luca Pollonini; Homer Abaya; Jannine Larky; Megan Loy; Heather Bortfeld; Michael S Beauchamp; John S Oghalai
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  Spatial Release from Masking Using Clinical Corpora: Sentence Recognition in a Colocated or Spatially Separated Speech Masker.

Authors:  Grant King; Nicole E Corbin; Lori J Leibold; Emily Buss
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 1.664

9.  Speech Understanding in Noise by Patients With Cochlear Implants Using a Monaural Adaptive Beamformer.

Authors:  Michael F Dorman; Sarah Natale; Anthony Spahr; Erin Castioni
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 2.297

10.  Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation (EAS) in Children: Investigating Benefit Afforded by Bilateral Versus Unilateral Acoustic Hearing.

Authors:  Jillian B Roberts; G Christopher Stecker; Jourdan T Holder; René H Gifford
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 2.311

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.