Comparison of Clinical and Traditional Gap Detection Tests

临床与传统间隙检测方法的比较

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Temporal resolution is important for speech recognition and may contribute to variability in speech recognition among patients. Clinical tests of temporal resolution are available, but it is not clear how closely results of those tests correspond to results of traditional temporal resolution tests. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the Gaps-in-Noise (GIN) test to a traditional measure of gap detection. STUDY SAMPLE: This study included older adults with hearing loss and younger adults with normal hearing. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Participants completed one practice and two test blocks of each gap detection test, and a measure of speech-in-noise recognition. Individual data were correlated to examine the relationship between the tests. RESULTS: The GIN and traditional gap detection were significantly, but not highly correlated. The traditional gap detection test contributed to variance in speech recognition in noise, while the GIN did not. CONCLUSIONS: The brevity and ease of implementing the GIN in the clinic make it a viable test of temporal resolution. However, it differs from traditional measures in implementation, and as a result relies on different cognitive factors. The GIN thresholds should be interpreted carefully and not presumed to represent an approximation of traditional gap detection thresholds.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。