Background and Aim: Migraine is a relatively common neurovascular disease. Audiology studies have shown some ways of influencing migraine by the auditory pathways from cochlea to the auditory cortex. Considering that one of the most important functions of the central auditory system is speech perception in challenging conditions, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability to understand speech in noise in migraineurs without aura, and compare it with normal subjects.Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 30 migraineurs without aura aged 17 to 41 years (mean=31.9, SD=6.89) and 30 normal individuals who were matched for age and sex with the migraine group were evaluated by quick speech-in-noise test (Q-SIN). The correlation between duration of the disease and the frequency of attacks per month and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) loss, as well as the role of headache severity on the scores were assessed.Results: In Q-SIN test, the mean SNR loss in migraineurs without aura was greater than that in controls (p<0.05). But this ability did not differ between males and females (p>0.05). There was no correlation between the duration of migraine, frequency of attacks per month and the severity of headache with SNR loss (p>0.05).Conclusion: Migraineurs without aura sometimes have difficulties in speech perception in noise which is not affected by duration of disease, its frequency and the severity of the attacks.

Background and Aim: Investigations have shown that the patient’s attitudes toward hearing loss and hearing aids impact hearing aid benefits and its use. In this regard, Saunders and Cien­kowski (1996) developed the “attitudes towards loss of hearing questionnaire” to examine some of the psychosocial factors underlying the use of hearing aids. This study has focused on pre­paring a Persian version of this questionnaire and analyzing its validity and reliability. Methods: The original English version of the questionnaire was translated into Persian, and its content and face validities were determined by related experts. The final questionnaire was administered to 100 hearing impaired people (52 males and 48 females) aged 30 to 65 years with the mean (SD) age of 54.54 (12.05) years. The test-retest reliability was assessed in 20 pat­ients. Results: The results of face validity assessment revealed that our questionnaire has a high quality in translation, intelligibility, and cultural compatibility. The mean scores of the content validity ratio and content validity index of this questionnaire was 0.71 and 0.98, respectively. The mean (SD) total score of this questionnaire was 60.46 (10.02) and the mean scores of denial of hearing loss, negative associations, negative coping strategies, manual dexterity and vision and hearing-related esteem were 15.58, 12.10, 20.40, 5.30, and 7.08, respectively. The overall Cronbach α value was 0.798. The test-retest reliability showed good results for the global score (Intraclass correlation = 0.989). Conclusion: Based on the obtained results, the Persian version of the questionnaire possesses satisfactory validity and reliability.

Background and Aim: Acceptable noise level (ANL) test is a reliable measure of people’s abi­lity to tolerate background noise. Central ner­vous system is one of the determinant factors in subject’s tolerance of noise. Bilinguals’ diffe­rent central activity pattern may yield different ANL test results from monolinguals. This study aims to compare noise tolerance function in Arabic-Persian bilinguals with Persian monolin­guals via Persian version of ANL. Methods: In the present study, the Persian ver­sion of ANL was administered on 115 cases with normal hearing (56 male, 59 female) aged 18–37 years in three groups of the Persian mon­olingual, sequential Arabic-Persian bilinguals, and simultaneous Arabic-Persian bilinguals. Results: The statistical analysis revealed sig­nificant difference in most comfortable level (p = 0.002) and background noise level (p = 0.011) among three groups, i.e. between Persian monolinguals and sequential Arabic-Persian bil­inguals and between Persian monolinguals and simultaneous Arabic-Persian bilinguals. In other words, mean scores of bilingual were higher than monolingual scores. There was no signifi­cant difference among three groups with regard to ANL scores (p = 0.114). * Corresponding author: Department of Audiology, School of Rehabilitation, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Piche-Shemiran, Enghelab Ave., Tehran, 1148965141, Iran. Tel: 009821-77530636, E-mail: ageshani@tums.ac.ir Conclusion: Despite the difference between Persian monolinguals and Arabic-Persian bilin­guals in most comfortable level and background noise level, there is no significance difference in ANL results. Therefore, auditory central proce­ssing acts similarly in normal hearing monolin­gual and bilingual subjects. As a result, Persian version of ANL can be used for Arabic-Persian bilinguals, too.

Background and Aim: The quick speech in noise (Q-SIN) test shows the difficulty of spee­ch perception in noise by specifying signal to noise ratio (SNR) loss. Although the Persian version of Q-SIN has been already constructed, the high-frequency emphasis version of this test is not available. The present study aimed to construct six lists with high-frequency emphasis and implement it. Methods: We are going to prepare a high-frequ­ency emphasis version of Q-SIN and then test it on a small sample. First, researchers designed the relevant sentences; then experts examined their content and face validity. According to the criteria for developing the Q-SIN test, six lists with high-frequency emphasis were prepared. The test was examined on 26 (13 male and 13 female), 18−35 years old individuals with nor­mal hearing. To determine the test reliability, it was re-administered three weeks later with the same conditions. Results: Of 76 sentences prepared, 36 sentences received enough credit after determination of their content and face validity. These 36 senten­ces were used to make 6 lists. The mean value of SNR50 in the Persian language was obtained -4 dB. The mean values of SNR loss in 6 lists were -1.65, -1.8, -2.23, -1.61, -2.38 and -2.07. The results showed equivalency of lists 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6. Examination of test-retest reliability indicated that all lists except the list 2were reliable. Conclusion: The lists of 1, 3, 4, and 6 are reli­able and equivalent and can be used in clinical application.