Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/132822
Title: A systematic review and metanalysis of questionnaires used for auditory processing screening and evaluation
Authors: Samara, Myrto
Thai-Van, Hung
Ptok, Martin
Glarou, Eleni
Veuillet, Evelyne
Miller, Simone
Reynard, Pierre
Grech, Helen
Utoomprurkporn, Nattawan
Sereti, Afroditi
Bamiou, Doris-Eva
Iliadou, Vasiliki Maria
Keywords: Word deafness -- Diagnosis
Hearing disorders -- Diagnosis
Auditory perceptual disorders -- Diagnosis
Auditory perception -- Testing
Speech perception -- Testing
Issue Date: 2023
Publisher: Frontiers Research Foundation
Citation: Samara, M., Thai-Van, H., Ptok, M., Glarou, E., Veuillet, E., Miller, S.,...Iliadou, V. M. (2023). A systematic review and metanalysis of questionnaires used for auditory processing screening and evaluation. Frontiers in Neurology, 14, 1243170.
Abstract: The recognition of Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) as a distinct clinical condition that impacts hearing capacity and mental health has gained attention. Although pure tone audiometry is the gold standard for assessing hearing, it inadequately reflects everyday hearing abilities, especially in challenging acoustic environments. Deficits in speech perception in noise, a key aspect of APD, have been linked to an increased risk of dementia. The World Health Organization emphasizes the need for evaluating central auditory function in cases of mild hearing loss and normal audiometry results. Specific questionnaires play a crucial role in documenting and quantifying the difficulties faced by individuals with APD. Validated questionnaires such as the Children’s Auditory Processing Performance Scale, the Fisher’s Auditory Problems Checklist, and the Auditory Processing Domains Questionnaire are available for children, while questionnaires for adults include items related to auditory functions associated with APD. This systematic review and meta-analysis identified six questionnaires used for screening and evaluating APD with a total of 783 participants across 12 studies. The questionnaires exhibited differences in domains evaluated, scoring methods, and evaluation of listening in quiet and noise. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that individuals with APD consistently exhibited worse scores compared to healthy controls across all questionnaires. Additionally, comparisons with clinical control groups showed varying results. The study highlights (i) the importance of standardized questionnaires in identifying and assessing APD, aiding in its diagnosis and management, and (ii) the need to use sub-scores as well as overall scores of questionnaires to elaborate on specific hearing and listening situations. There is a need to develop more APD specific questionnaires for the adult population as well as for more focused research on APD diagnosed individuals to further establish the validity and reliability of these questionnaires.
URI: https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/132822
Appears in Collections:Scholarly Works - FacHScCT



Items in OAR@UM are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.