Development and psychometric evaluation of the Persian version of the Phoneme Recognition Test A central auditory processing measure
Iranian Journal of Child Neurology,
Vol. 16 No. 3 (2022),
16 July 2022
,
Page 79-93
https://doi.org/10.22037/ijcn.v15i4.28648
Abstract
Objectives
The present study evaluating the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Phoneme Recognition Test (P-PRT) in normal subjects and cochlear implant (CI) users.
Material & Methods
This study includes developing the Persian phoneme recognition test (PRT), determining its validity and reliability, and comparing the results of a control group versus CI users. The test reliability was examined through a test-retest with an approximately five-week interval. In the present survey, 363 subjects were investigated in three stages. The face validity evaluation stage was conducted on 40 subjects. The psychometric properties of the P-PRT were evaluated in 323 individuals (225 normal subjects and 98 CI users). The test-retest reliability was examined in all the 225 subjects in the control group
and 40 CI users.
Results
The results confirmed the face validity of the P-PRT. No significant differences were observed between the two genders in terms of performance in the P-PRT. Significant differences were observed between the control and CI groups. Evaluating the test-retest reliability suggested perfect reliability (r>0.9) in both groups. Significant differences were observed in the P-PRT between the adults and the 7-year-old subjects compared to other age groups.
Conclusion
The P-PRT can be used as a valid and reliable test for clinically evaluating phoneme recognition abilities and monitoring the rehabilitation progress
- Phoneme recognition test (PRT)
- test development
- cochlear implant
- auditory processing
How to Cite
References
Katz J. The Buffalo CAPD Model: The Importance of Phonemes in Evaluation and Remediation. J Phonetics Audiol. 2016;
Lurii︠a︡ A. Higher cortical functions in man. New York, USA; 1966. 118–119 p.
Luriia A, Louriâ A. Traumatic aphasia: its syndromes, psychology and treatment [Internet]. 1970 [cited 2020 Jan 14]. Available from: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=iIk72yFfBlsC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=Traumatic+Aphasias+Its+Syndromes:+Psychology+and+Treatment&ots=tvvwa6TZdX&sig=EOMUMpjBlHHB0MCyYYk2IoYYNUA
Katz, J., J. Ferre, W. Keith and ALA. Central Auditory Processing Disorders: Therapy and Management.” In Handbook of Clinical Audiology, 7th ed. edited by J. Katz, 550. Vol. 2, Handbook of Clinical Audiology. 2015. 49–59 p.
Emanuel DC, Ficca KN, Korczak P. Survey of the diagnosis and management of auditory processing disorder. Am J Audiol. 2011;
Gallun FJ, Diedesch AC, Kubli LR, Walden TC, Folmer RL, Samantha Lewis S, et al. Performance on tests of central auditory processing by individuals exposed to high-intensity blasts. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012;
Jutras B, Loubert M, Dupuis JL, Marcoux C, Dumont V, Baril M. Applicability of central auditory processing disorder models. Am J Audiol. 2007;
Katz J, Ferre J, Keith W A AL. Handbook of Clinical Audiology (7th Edn) Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore pp. 7th ed. 2015. 561–582 p.
J K. Therapy for Auditory Processing Disorders: Simple, Effective Procedures. Educational Audiology AssociationDenver, USA; 2012.
Katz J, Harmon C. Phonemic synthesis: Blending sounds into words. 1982;
disorders JK-C auditory processing, 1998 undefined. Central auditory processing and cochlear implant therapy. Allyn and Bacon Boston ….
Masters M, Stecker N, Katz J. Central auditory processing disorders: Mostly management. [Internet]. 1998 [cited 2020 Jan 14]. Available from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED436062
Katz J FC. Central Test Battery Kit [Buffalo Model for Auditory Processing Disorders Test Battery] [Internet]. Vancouver; 2004. Available from: http://precisionacoustics.org/
Higginson IJ. Quality criteria valuable with slight modification. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2007.
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: An international Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2010;
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;
Ehsan Negin SSB. Central Auditory Processing Assessments; Buffalo Model of Auditory Processing. 2018;1:212.
Negin E, Jarollahi F, Barootiyan SS, Seyyedi F, Jalaie S, Katz J. Development, validity, reliability and normative data of the Persian Phonemic Synthesis Test (P-PST). Int J Audiol. 2019;
Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971;
Parkin JL, Dankowski MK. Speech Performance by Patients with Multichannel Cochlear Implants. Otolaryngol Neck Surg. 1986;95(2):205–9.
Luxford WM. Minimum speech test battery for postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant patients. Otolaryngol - Head Neck Surg. 2001;
Välimaa TT, Määttä TK, Löppönen HJ, Sorri MJ. Phoneme recognition and confusions with multichannel cochlear implants: Vowels. J Speech, Lang Hear Res. 2002;
SAKI1 N, , MAJID KARIMI 2 SM 2, ROSTAMI2 MR, NIKAKHLAGH1 and S, *. Evaluation of Loudness Perception Performance in Cochlear Implant Users. Biomed Pharmacol J [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2020 Jan 13];8:79–83. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bpj/561
Saki, Nader; Nikakhlagh, Soheila; Abshirini, Hassan; yadollahpour, Ali; Karimi, Majid; Mirahmadi, Saeed; Rostami MR. EBSCOhost | 116233248 | Auditory Temporal Processing Performance in Cochlear Implant Users. [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Jan 13]. p. 179–82. Available from: https://web.a.ebscohost.com/abstract?direct=true&profile=ehost&scope=site&authtype=crawler&jrnl=22773657&AN=116233248&h=x0TLV7jsIOc2a5exCQhBluGlkl6xwOZDmcxQ749I2amIzRdD%2BfuRdSB3T3rWjsM%2BMTffC7MYhp5l4EYdFnbr%2BA%3D%3D&crl=c&resultNs=AdminWebAuth&resultLo
Saki N, Nikakhlagh S, Mirmomeni G, Bayat A. Perceptual organization of sequential stimuli in cochlear implant listeners: A temporal processing approach. Int Tinnitus J. 2019;
Oxenham AJ, Kreft HA. Speech perception in tones and noise via cochlear implants reveals influence of spectral resolution on temporal processing. Trends Hear. 2014;
Fu QJ. Temporal processing and speech recognition in cochlear implant users. Neuroreport. 2002;
Nie K, Barco A, Zeng FG. Spectral and temporal cues in cochlear implant speech perception. Ear Hear. 2006;
Friesen LM, Shannon R V., Baskent D, Wang X. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: Comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001;
Garnham C, O’Driscoll M, Ramsden R, Saeed S. Speech understanding in noise with a Med-El COMBI 40+ cochlear implant using reduced channel sets. Ear Hear. 2002;
Nelson PB, Jin S-H, Carney AE, Nelson DA. Understanding speech in modulated interference: Cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003;
Qin MK, Oxenham AJ. Effects of simulated cochlear-implant processing on speech reception in fluctuating maskers. J Acoust Soc Am. 2003;
Stickney GS, Zeng F-G, Litovsky R, Assmann P. Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004;
Smith ZM, Delgutte B, Oxenham AJ. Chimaeric sounds reveal dichotomies in auditory perception. Nature. 2002;
Campos PD, Alvarenga K de F, Frederigue NB, do Nascimento LT, Sameshima K, Filho OAC, et al. Temporal organization skills in cochlear implants recipients. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2008;
Vandali AE, Whitford LA, Plant KL, Clark GM. Speech perception as a function of electrical stimulation rate: Using the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system. Ear Hear. 2000;
Negin E, Mohammadkhani G, Jalaie S, Jarollahi F. Efficacy of phonemic training program in rehabilitation of Persian-speaking children with auditory processing disorder: a single subject study. Audit Vestib Res. 2018;
Sadat Barootiyan S, Jalilvand Karimi L, Jalaie S, Negin E. Development and evaluation of the efficacy of Persian phonemic synthesis program in children with (central) auditory processing disorder: a single subject study. Audit Vestib Res. 2018;
- Abstract Viewed: 344 times