↓ Skip to main content

Perceptual Implications of Level- and Frequency-Specific Deviations from Hearing Aid Prescription in Children

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
75 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.
Article details
Title
Perceptual Implications of Level- and Frequency-Specific Deviations from Hearing Aid Prescription in Children
Published in
Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, October 2017
DOI 10.3766/jaaa.17014
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The purpose of providing amplification for children with hearing loss is to make speech audible across a range of frequencies and intensities. Children with hearing aids (HAs) that closely approximate prescriptive targets have better audibility than peers with HA output below prescriptive targets. Poor aided audibility puts children with hearing loss at risk for delays in communication, social, and academic development. The goals of this study were to determine how well HAs match prescriptive targets across ranges of frequency and intensity of speech and to determine how level- and frequency-dependent deviations from prescriptive target affect speech recognition in quiet and in background noise. One-hundred sixty-six children with permanent mild to severe hearing loss who were between 6 months and 8 years of age and who wore HAs participated in the study. Hearing aid verification and speech recognition data were collected as part of a longitudinal study of communication development in children with HAs. Hearing aid output at levels of soft and average speech and maximum power output were compared with each child's prescriptive targets. The deviations from prescriptive target were quantified based on the root-mean-square (RMS) error and absolute deviation from target for octave frequencies. Children were classified into groups based on the number of level-dependent deviations from prescriptive target. Frequency-specific deviations from prescriptive target and sensation levels (SLs) were used to estimate the proximity of fittings across the frequency range. Lexical Neighborhood Test (LNT) word recognition in quiet and Computer-Assisted Speech Perception Assessment (CASPA) phoneme recognition in noise were compared across level-dependent error groups and as a function of SL at 4 kHz. Children who had deviations from prescriptive target at all three input levels had poorer LNT word recognition in quiet than children who had fittings that matched prescriptive target within 5 dB RMS at all three input levels. Children with lower 4 kHz SLs through their HAs had poorer LNT recognition in quiet and CASPA phoneme recognition in noise than children with higher aided SLs. Children with HAs fitted to provide audibility for speech across a range of inputs and frequencies had better speech recognition outcomes than peers with HAs that were not optimally fitted to prescriptive targets.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 17%
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 31 41%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 12%
Psychology 5 7%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 32 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 December 2024.
All research outputs
#10,609,568
of 32,455,721 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Academy of Audiology
#190
of 670 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,233
of 350,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Academy of Audiology
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,455,721 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 670 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
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 350,885 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.