Reliable Online Auditory Cognitive Testing: An observational study

Meher Lad, John-Paul Taylor, Timothy Griffiths
{"title":"Reliable Online Auditory Cognitive Testing: An observational study","authors":"Meher Lad, John-Paul Taylor, Timothy Griffiths","doi":"10.1101/2024.09.17.24313794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Technological advances have allowed researchers to conduct research remotely. Online auditory testing has received interest since the Covid-19 pandemic. A number of web-based developments have improved the range of auditory tasks during remote participation. Most of these studies have been conducted in young, motivated individuals who are comfortable with technology. Such studies have also used stimuli testing auditory perceptual abilities. Research on auditory cognitive abilities in real-world older adults is lacking. In this study, we assess the reproducibility of a range of auditory cognitive abilities in older adults, with a range of hearing abilities, who took part in in-person and online experiments.\nParticipants performed a questionnaire-based assessment and were asked to complete two verbal speech-in-noise perception tasks, for digits and sentences, and two auditory memory tasks, for different sound features. In the first part of the study, 58 Participants performed these tests in-person and online in order to test the reproducibility of the tasks. In the second part, 147 participants conducted all the tasks online in order to test if previously published findings from in-person research were reproducible. We found that older adults under the age of 70 and those with a better hearing were more likely to take part in online testing. The questionnaire-based test had significantly better reproducibility than the behavioural auditory tests but there were no differences in reproducibility between in-person and online auditory cognitive metrics. Relationships between relationships with age and hearing thresholds in an in-person or online setting were not significantly different. Furthermore, important relationships between auditory metrics, evidenced in literature previously, were reproducible online. This study suggests that auditory cognitive testing may be reliably conducted online.","PeriodicalId":501454,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Informatics","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.17.24313794","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Technological advances have allowed researchers to conduct research remotely. Online auditory testing has received interest since the Covid-19 pandemic. A number of web-based developments have improved the range of auditory tasks during remote participation. Most of these studies have been conducted in young, motivated individuals who are comfortable with technology. Such studies have also used stimuli testing auditory perceptual abilities. Research on auditory cognitive abilities in real-world older adults is lacking. In this study, we assess the reproducibility of a range of auditory cognitive abilities in older adults, with a range of hearing abilities, who took part in in-person and online experiments. Participants performed a questionnaire-based assessment and were asked to complete two verbal speech-in-noise perception tasks, for digits and sentences, and two auditory memory tasks, for different sound features. In the first part of the study, 58 Participants performed these tests in-person and online in order to test the reproducibility of the tasks. In the second part, 147 participants conducted all the tasks online in order to test if previously published findings from in-person research were reproducible. We found that older adults under the age of 70 and those with a better hearing were more likely to take part in online testing. The questionnaire-based test had significantly better reproducibility than the behavioural auditory tests but there were no differences in reproducibility between in-person and online auditory cognitive metrics. Relationships between relationships with age and hearing thresholds in an in-person or online setting were not significantly different. Furthermore, important relationships between auditory metrics, evidenced in literature previously, were reproducible online. This study suggests that auditory cognitive testing may be reliably conducted online.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
可靠的在线听觉认知测试:观察研究
技术进步使研究人员能够进行远程研究。自 Covid-19 大流行以来,在线听觉测试受到了关注。一些基于网络的开发改进了远程参与过程中听觉任务的范围。这些研究的对象大多是年轻、有上进心、熟悉技术的人。这些研究还使用了测试听觉感知能力的刺激物。对现实世界中老年人听觉认知能力的研究还很缺乏。在这项研究中,我们评估了具有不同听力能力的老年人的一系列听觉认知能力的可重复性,这些老年人参加了现场和在线实验。参与者进行了基于问卷的评估,并被要求完成两项噪音中的言语感知任务(针对数字和句子)和两项听觉记忆任务(针对不同的声音特征)。在研究的第一部分,58 名参与者分别在现场和网上完成了这些测试,以测试任务的可重复性。在第二部分中,147 名参与者在网上完成了所有任务,以检验之前公布的现场研究结果是否具有可重复性。我们发现,70 岁以下的老年人和听力较好的人更愿意参加在线测试。基于问卷的测试的再现性明显优于行为听觉测试,但现场和在线听觉认知指标的再现性没有差异。亲自测试和在线测试中年龄与听阈之间的关系没有显著差异。此外,以前在文献中证实的听觉指标之间的重要关系在网上也具有再现性。这项研究表明,听觉认知测试可以在网上可靠地进行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A case is not a case is not a case - challenges and solutions in determining urolithiasis caseloads using the digital infrastructure of a clinical data warehouse Reliable Online Auditory Cognitive Testing: An observational study Federated Multiple Imputation for Variables that Are Missing Not At Random in Distributed Electronic Health Records Characterizing the connection between Parkinson's disease progression and healthcare utilization Generative AI and Large Language Models in Reducing Medication Related Harm and Adverse Drug Events - A Scoping Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1