TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessment methods for determining small changes in hearing performance over time
AU - Brungart, Douglas S.
AU - Sherlock, Laguinn P.
AU - Kuchinsky, Stefanie E.
AU - Perry, Trevor T.
AU - Bieber, Rebecca E.
AU - Grant, Ken W.
AU - Bernstein, Joshua G.W.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 U.S. Government.
PY - 2022/6/1
Y1 - 2022/6/1
N2 - Although the behavioral pure-tone threshold audiogram is considered the gold standard for quantifying hearing loss, assessment of speech understanding, especially in noise, is more relevant to quality of life but is only partly related to the audiogram. Metrics of speech understanding in noise are therefore an attractive target for assessing hearing over time. However, speech-in-noise assessments have more potential sources of variability than pure-tone threshold measures, making it a challenge to obtain results reliable enough to detect small changes in performance. This review examines the benefits and limitations of speech-understanding metrics and their application to longitudinal hearing assessment, and identifies potential sources of variability, including learning effects, differences in item difficulty, and between- and within-individual variations in effort and motivation. We conclude by recommending the integration of non-speech auditory tests, which provide information about aspects of auditory health that have reduced variability and fewer central influences than speech tests, in parallel with the traditional audiogram and speech-based assessments.
AB - Although the behavioral pure-tone threshold audiogram is considered the gold standard for quantifying hearing loss, assessment of speech understanding, especially in noise, is more relevant to quality of life but is only partly related to the audiogram. Metrics of speech understanding in noise are therefore an attractive target for assessing hearing over time. However, speech-in-noise assessments have more potential sources of variability than pure-tone threshold measures, making it a challenge to obtain results reliable enough to detect small changes in performance. This review examines the benefits and limitations of speech-understanding metrics and their application to longitudinal hearing assessment, and identifies potential sources of variability, including learning effects, differences in item difficulty, and between- and within-individual variations in effort and motivation. We conclude by recommending the integration of non-speech auditory tests, which provide information about aspects of auditory health that have reduced variability and fewer central influences than speech tests, in parallel with the traditional audiogram and speech-based assessments.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85133909763&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1121/10.0011509
DO - 10.1121/10.0011509
M3 - Article
C2 - 35778214
AN - SCOPUS:85133909763
SN - 0001-4966
VL - 151
SP - 3866
EP - 3885
JO - Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
JF - Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
IS - 6
ER -