Impact of Digital Labeling on Outcome Measures

Bentler, Ruth A.; Niebuhr, Diane P.; Johnson, Tiffany A.; Flamme, Gregory A.

doi:10.1097/01.aud.0000069228.46916.92

Cited by 51 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are studies in which little or no relation between reported benefit and measured benefit is found (e.g., Cox & Alexander, 1992;Haggard, Foster, & Iredale, 1981). Yet other investigations find participants reporting strong preferences for one of two pairs of hearing aids worn during a study, even though both pairs of hearing aids were identical (Bentler, Niebuhr, Johnson, & Flamme, 2000;McClymont, Browning, & Gatehouse, 1991). Finally, there are investigations in which hearing aid setting preferences in the laboratory do not transfer to real-world use (Preminger & Cunningham, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) and Its Relationship to Aided Reported Handicap and Hearing Aid Satisfaction

Saunders

Forsline

2006

Ear and Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study showed the PPT to be a reliable outcome measure that can provide more information than a performance measure and/or a questionnaire measure alone, in that the PPDIS can provide the clinician with an explanation for discrepant objective and subjective reports of hearing difficulties. The finding that self-reported handicap is affected independently by both actual ability to hear and the (mis)perception of ability to hear underscores the difficulty clinicians encounter when trying to interpret outcomes questionnaires. We suggest that this variable should be measured and taken into account when interpreting questionnaires and counseling patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) and Its Relationship to Aided Reported Handicap and Hearing Aid Satisfaction

Saunders

Forsline

2006

Ear and Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are others in which little or no relationship between reported benefit and measured benefit is found (Cox & Alexander, 1992;Haggard, Foster & Iredale, 1981). Yet other investigations find subjects reporting strong preferences for one of two pairs of hearing aids worn during studies in which both pairs of hearing aids were identical (Bentler, Niebuhr, Johnson & Flamme, 2000;McClymont, Browning & Gatehouse, 1991). It is difficult to reconcile conflicting data such as these, in part because the materials and formats used for measuring speech performance are so very different from the questionnaires used for subjective evaluations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

The Performance-Perceptual Test and Its Relationship to Unaided Reported Handicap

Saunders¹,

Forsline²,

Fausti³

2004

Ear and Hearing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reported handicap consists of a performance component and a (mis)perception component, as measured by the Performance SRTN and the PPDIS respectively. The PPT should thus prove to be a valuable tool for better understanding why some individuals complain of hearing difficulties but have only a mild hearing loss or conversely report few difficulties in the presence of substantial impairment. The measure would thus seem to provide both an explanation and a counseling tool for patients for whom there is a mismatch between reported and measured hearing difficulties.

show abstract

“…Relatively few improvements were obtained with objective measurements. It was also demonstrated by Bentler et al 120 in a clever experiment that there was a significant halo effect in that if a subject believed a hearing aid to be a digital instrument, then the subjective assessment of the hearing aid was likely to be more positive than if the subject believed otherwise.…”

Section: Comparing Analog and Digital Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 92%

A Historical Perspective on Digital Hearing Aids: How Digital Technology Has Changed Modern Hearing Aids

Levitt

2007

Trends in Amplification

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides the author's perspective on the development of digital hearing aids and how digital signal processing approaches have led to changes in hearing aid design. Major landmarks in the evolution of digital technology are identified, and their impact on the development of digital hearing aids is discussed. Differences between analog and digital approaches to signal processing in hearing aids are identified.

show abstract

Impact of Digital Labeling on Outcome Measures

Abstract: The results of this investigation indicate a need for double-blinding in hearing aid research aimed at assessing the effectiveness of newer technologies, as well as a need for clinicians to critically evaluate the research describing the potential advantages of certain circuit options.

Cited by 51 publications

References 11 publications

The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) and Its Relationship to Aided Reported Handicap and Hearing Aid Satisfaction

The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) and Its Relationship to Aided Reported Handicap and Hearing Aid Satisfaction

The Performance-Perceptual Test and Its Relationship to Unaided Reported Handicap

A Historical Perspective on Digital Hearing Aids: How Digital Technology Has Changed Modern Hearing Aids

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About