How close should a student with unilateral hearing loss stay to a teacher in a noisy classroom?

Noh, Heil; Park, Yong Gyu

doi:10.3109/14992027.2012.654855

Cited by 25 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been found that individuals with UHL must sit approximately half the distance away from a speaker as an individual with NH to have similar speech discrimination. 35 Although this meta-analysis suggests that children with UHL have lower IQ scores, it is important to consider the limitations of the study. First, only four observational studies were identified for inclusion in the meta-analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Children with unilateral hearing loss may have lower intelligence quotient scores: A meta‐analysis

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective In this meta-analysis, we reviewed observational studies investigating differences in intelligence quotient (IQ) scores of children with unilateral hearing loss compared to children with normal hearing. Data sources PubMed Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, PsycINFO Review methods A query identified all English-language studies related to pediatric unilateral hearing loss published between January 1980 and December 2014. Titles, abstracts and articles were reviewed to identify observational studies reporting IQ scores. Results There were 261 unique titles with 29 articles undergoing full review. Four articles were identified, which included 173 children with unilateral hearing loss and 202 children with normal hearing. Ages ranged from 6 to 18 years. Three studies were conducted in the United States, and one in Mexico. All were of high quality. All studies reported full-scale IQ results; 3 reported verbal IQ results, and 2 reported performance IQ results. Children with unilateral hearing loss scored 6.3 points lower on full-scale IQ, 95% CI [−9.1, −3.5], p-value <0.001; and 3.8 points lower on performance IQ, 95% CI [−7.3, −0.2], p-value 0.04. When investigating verbal IQ, we detected substantial heterogeneity among studies; exclusion of the outlying study resulted in significant difference in verbal IQ of 4 points, 95% CI [−7.5, −0.4], p-value 0.028. Conclusions This meta-analysis suggests children with unilateral hearing loss have lower full-scale and performance IQ scores than children with normal hearing. There also may be disparity in verbal IQ scores. Future studies should investigate ways to reduce potential differences in intellectual achievement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Preferential seating at the front of the class is another option for educational support. It has been found that individuals with UHL must sit approximately half the distance away from a speaker as an individual with NH to have similar speech discrimination …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children with unilateral hearing loss may have lower intelligence quotient scores: A meta‐analysis

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Understanding soft speech is enhanced with bilateral input due to binaural-summation effects, which improve signal detection (Hirsh 1948). Although few studies have addressed listening at soft presentation levels, UHL presumably affects listening at increased distances or when speech intensities are lowered (Bess and Tharpe 1986; Noh et al 2012). Bilateral input also adds redundancy and thus improves information processing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unilateral Hearing Loss: Understanding Speech Recognition and Localization Variability—Implications for Cochlear Implant Candidacy

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives At a minimum, unilateral hearing loss (UHL) impairs sound localization ability and understanding speech in noisy environments, particularly if the loss is severe to profound. Accompanying the numerous negative consequences of UHL is considerable unexplained individual variability in the magnitude of its effects. Identification of co-variables that affect outcome and contribute to variability in UHLs could augment counseling, treatment options, and rehabilitation. Cochlear implantation as a treatment for UHL is on the rise yet little is known about factors that could impact performance or whether there is a group at risk for poor cochlear implant outcomes when hearing is near-normal in one ear. The overall goal of our research is to investigate the range and source of variability in speech recognition in noise and localization among individuals with severe to profound UHL and thereby help determine factors relevant to decisions regarding cochlear implantation in this population. Design The present study evaluated adults with severe to profound UHL and adults with bilateral normal hearing. Measures included adaptive sentence understanding in diffuse restaurant noise, localization, roving-source speech recognition (words from 1 of 15 speakers in a 140° arc) and an adaptive speech-reception threshold psychoacoustic task with varied noise types and noise-source locations. There were three age-gender-matched groups: UHL (severe to profound hearing loss in one ear and normal hearing in the contralateral ear), normal hearing listening bilaterally, and normal hearing listening unilaterally. Results Although the normal-hearing-bilateral group scored significantly better and had less performance variability than UHLs on all measures, some UHL participants scored within the range of the normal-hearing-bilateral group on all measures. The normal-hearing participants listening unilaterally had better monosyllabic word understanding than UHLs for words presented on the blocked/deaf side but not the open/hearing side. In contrast, UHLs localized better than the normal hearing unilateral listeners for stimuli on the open/hearing side but not the blocked/deaf side. This suggests that UHLs had learned strategies for improved localization on the side of the intact ear. The UHL and unilateral normal hearing participant groups were not significantly different for speech-in-noise measures. UHL participants with childhood rather than recent hearing loss onset localized significantly better; however, these two groups did not differ for speech recognition in noise. Age at onset in UHL adults appears to affect localization ability differently than understanding speech in noise. Hearing thresholds were significantly correlated with speech recognition for UHL participants but not the other two groups. Conclusions Auditory abilities of UHLs varied widely and could be explained only in part by hearing threshold levels. Age at onset and length of hearing loss influenced performance on some, but not all measures. Results suppo...

show abstract

“…There are relatively few data pertinent to SRM in school-age children with permanent sensorineural UHL, but available data indicate reduced benefit of target/masker spatial separation and poorer speech recognition overall for children with UHL (e.g., Bess et al 1986; Bovo et al 1988; Hartvig et al 1989; Kenworthy et al 1990; Updike 1994; Lieu et al 2010; Noh & Park 2012; Lieu et al 2013; Reeder et al 2015). For example, Reeder et al (2015) reported that 7- to 16-year-olds with moderately-severe to profound sensorineural UHL performed worse than age-matched peers with normal hearing on a range of tasks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial Release From Masking in Children: Effects of Simulated Unilateral Hearing Loss

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The purpose of this study was twofold: 1) to determine the effect of an acute simulated unilateral hearing loss on children’s spatial release from masking in two-talker speech and speech-shaped noise, and 2) to develop a procedure to be used in future studies that will assess spatial release from masking in children who have permanent unilateral hearing loss. There were three main predictions. First, spatial release from masking was expected to be larger in two-talker speech than speech-shaped noise. Second, simulated unilateral hearing loss was expected to worsen performance in all listening conditions, but particularly in the spatially separated two-talker speech masker. Third, spatial release from masking was expected to be smaller for children than for adults in the two-talker masker. Design Participants were 12 children (8.7 to 10.9 yrs) and 11 adults (18.5 to 30.4 yrs) with normal bilateral hearing. Thresholds for 50%-correct recognition of Bamford-Kowal-Bench sentences were measured adaptively in continuous two-talker speech or speech-shaped noise. Target sentences were always presented from a loudspeaker at 0° azimuth. The masker stimulus was either co-located with the target or spatially separated to +90° or −90° azimuth. Spatial release from masking was quantified as the difference between thresholds obtained when the target and masker were co-located and thresholds obtained when the masker was presented from +90° or − 90°. Testing was completed both with and without a moderate simulated unilateral hearing loss, created with a foam earplug and supra-aural earmuff. A repeated-measures design was used to compare performance between children and adults, and performance in the no-plug and simulated-unilateral-hearing-loss conditions. Results All listeners benefited from spatial separation of target and masker stimuli on the azimuth plane in the no-plug listening conditions; this benefit was larger in two-talker speech than in speech-shaped noise. In the simulated-unilateral-hearing-loss conditions, a positive spatial release from masking was observed only when the masker was presented ipsilateral to the simulated unilateral hearing loss. In the speech-shaped noise masker, spatial release from masking in the no-plug condition was similar to that obtained when the masker was presented ipsilateral to the simulated unilateral hearing loss. In contrast, in the two-talker speech masker, spatial release from masking in the no-plug condition was much larger than that obtained when the masker was presented ipsilateral to the simulated unilateral hearing loss. When either masker was presented contralateral to the simulated unilateral hearing loss, spatial release from masking was negative. This pattern of results was observed for both children and adults, although children performed more poorly overall. Conclusions Children and adults with normal bilateral hearing experience greater spatial release from masking for a two-talker speech than a speech-shaped noise masker. Testing in a two-talker speec...

show abstract

How close should a student with unilateral hearing loss stay to a teacher in a noisy classroom?

Abstract: Students with UHL in noisy classrooms require seating ranging from 4.35 m to no further than 6.27 m away from a teacher to obtain a SDS comparable to normal hearing adults and student peers.

Cited by 25 publications

References 30 publications

Children with unilateral hearing loss may have lower intelligence quotient scores: A meta‐analysis

Children with unilateral hearing loss may have lower intelligence quotient scores: A meta‐analysis

Unilateral Hearing Loss: Understanding Speech Recognition and Localization Variability—Implications for Cochlear Implant Candidacy

Spatial Release From Masking in Children: Effects of Simulated Unilateral Hearing Loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About