A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis for Better Measurement of Listening Effort in Adults with Hearing Loss

Q3 Medicine Audiology and Speech Research Pub Date : 2020-12-16 DOI:10.21848/asr.200071
Chanbeom Kwak, Woojae Han
{"title":"A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis for Better Measurement of Listening Effort in Adults with Hearing Loss","authors":"Chanbeom Kwak, Woojae Han","doi":"10.21848/asr.200071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study aimed to identify better tools for measuring listening effort in the hearing-impaired and/or hearing aid users and to suggest its clinical implication by using systematic review and meta-analysis. To search articles from six electronic databases, ‘listening effort’, ‘hearing loss/hearing impaired’, and ‘hearing aid(s)’ were used as their key terms. Although 8,761 articles were found initially, only 19 articles which met the inclusion criteria were applied to the further review and analysis. In a checklist of the study quality, there was no significant difference between the articles. Based on meta-analysis of three subgroups (i.e., objective, subjective, and self-report rating), the objective measurements showed statistically significant and the highest effect size (1.031, 95% confidence interval: -0.106-2.169), whereas the self-report rating had the lowest effect size (-1.280, 95% confidence interval: -4.180-1.620) with no significance. Although the funnel plot was asymmetrical, the Egger’s regression asymmetry test revealed no publication bias. In sum, the objective measurement showed the most effective way to evaluate the listening effort for the hearing-impaired and/or hearing aid users. However, there was a non-negligible variance between the types of measurements. In the following study, we suggest to investigate certain relationship between listening effort and speech perception performance in the hearing-impaired and/or hearing aid users and to establish standardized criteria for clinical purposes of the listening effort.","PeriodicalId":36841,"journal":{"name":"Audiology and Speech Research","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Audiology and Speech Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21848/asr.200071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study aimed to identify better tools for measuring listening effort in the hearing-impaired and/or hearing aid users and to suggest its clinical implication by using systematic review and meta-analysis. To search articles from six electronic databases, ‘listening effort’, ‘hearing loss/hearing impaired’, and ‘hearing aid(s)’ were used as their key terms. Although 8,761 articles were found initially, only 19 articles which met the inclusion criteria were applied to the further review and analysis. In a checklist of the study quality, there was no significant difference between the articles. Based on meta-analysis of three subgroups (i.e., objective, subjective, and self-report rating), the objective measurements showed statistically significant and the highest effect size (1.031, 95% confidence interval: -0.106-2.169), whereas the self-report rating had the lowest effect size (-1.280, 95% confidence interval: -4.180-1.620) with no significance. Although the funnel plot was asymmetrical, the Egger’s regression asymmetry test revealed no publication bias. In sum, the objective measurement showed the most effective way to evaluate the listening effort for the hearing-impaired and/or hearing aid users. However, there was a non-negligible variance between the types of measurements. In the following study, we suggest to investigate certain relationship between listening effort and speech perception performance in the hearing-impaired and/or hearing aid users and to establish standardized criteria for clinical purposes of the listening effort.
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
听力损失成人听力努力更好测量的系统回顾和荟萃分析
本研究旨在通过系统回顾和荟萃分析,确定更好的工具来衡量听力受损和/或助听器使用者的听力努力,并提出其临床意义。在六个电子资料库中,以“听力努力”、“听力损失/听力受损”及“助听器”作为检索关键词。虽然最初发现了8,761篇文章,但只有19篇符合纳入标准的文章被用于进一步的审查和分析。在研究质量检查表中,文章之间没有显著差异。对客观、主观和自述评分三个亚组进行meta分析,客观测量结果具有统计学意义,其效应量最高(1.031,95%可信区间:-0.106 ~ 2.169),而自述评分的效应量最低(-1.280,95%可信区间:-4.180 ~ 1.620),无统计学意义。虽然漏斗图是不对称的,但Egger 's回归不对称检验显示没有发表偏倚。总之,客观测量是评估听力受损和/或助听器使用者听力努力的最有效方法。然而,测量类型之间存在不可忽略的差异。在接下来的研究中,我们建议研究听力受损和/或助听器使用者的听力努力与言语感知表现之间的某种关系,并为听力努力的临床目的建立标准化的标准。
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
Audiology and Speech Research
Audiology and Speech Research Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
Research on Effective Methodology for Hearing Impairment Rehabilitation; Based on a Diary Study for Elderly OnlineAuditory Training Self-Reported Hearing Difficulties and Hearing Aid Uptake Validity and Reliability of the Korean Version of the Spatial Hearing Questionnaire in Cochlear Implant Users Research Trends According to the Speech Production Mechanism of Patients with Dysarthria Caused by Acute Brain Injury in Korea The Necessity for Auditory Training with Idiomatic Expressions
×
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