↓ Skip to main content

Danish reading span data from 283 hearing-aid users, including a sub-group analysis of their relationship to speech-in-noise performance

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Audiology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Danish reading span data from 283 hearing-aid users, including a sub-group analysis of their relationship to speech-in-noise performance
Published in
International Journal of Audiology, February 2016
DOI 10.3109/14992027.2015.1125533
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eline Borch Petersen, Thomas Lunner, Martin D. Vestergaard, Elisabet Sundewall Thorén

Abstract

This study provides descriptive statistics of the Danish reading span (RS) test for hearing-impaired adults. The combined effect of hearing loss, RS score, and age on speech-in-noise performance in different spatial settings was evaluated in a subset of participants. Data from published and unpublished studies were re-analysed. Data regarding speech-in-noise performance with co-located or spatially separated sound sources were available for a subset of participants. RS scores from 283 hearing-impaired participants were extracted from past studies, and 239 of these participants had completed a speech-in-noise test. RS scores (mean = 41.91%, standard deviation = 11.29%) were related to age (p <0.01), but not pure-tone average (PTA) (p = 0.29). Speech-in-noise performance for co-located sound sources was related to PTA and RS score (both p < 0.01, adjusted R-squared = 0.226). Performance for spatially separated sounds was related to PTA (p < 0.01, adjusted R-squared = 0.10) but not RS score (p = 0.484). We found no differences between the standardized coefficients of the two regression models. The distribution of RS scores indicated a high test difficulty. We found that age should be controlled when RS scores are compared across populations. The experimental setup of the speech-in-noise test may influence the relationship between performance and RS score.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 23%
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Master 6 10%
Librarian 5 8%
Other 4 6%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Computer Science 7 11%
Psychology 7 11%
Engineering 6 10%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 21 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Audiology
#980
of 1,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,744
of 405,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Audiology
#15
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 405,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.