Development of the Persian Version of Dichotic Offset Measure and Evaluation of Its Psychometric Properties in Normal-hearing Children: A Pilot Study
Background and Aim: Buffalo model consists of four Central Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD) categories: decoding, tolerance-fading memory, organization, and integration. Integration is considered as the most complex category. The Dichotic Offset Measure (DOM) provides valuable information about the organization and integration problems. The present study aimed to develop the Persian version of the DOM (P-DOM) and evaluate its psychometric properties in normal-hearing children.
Methods: In this study, 25 normal-hearing children (13 girls) aged 7–12 years participated and were divided into six age groups. The face validity was determined based on the opinions of 15 experts, five children with CAPD, and five normal-hearing children. All children were tested with the Persian staggered spondaic word test, Persian phonemic synthesis test, and the Persian randomized dichotic digit test.
Results: The results showed the high face validity of the P-DOM. No significant differences were observed between the scores of girls and boys (p=0.394 for the right non-competing, p=0.623 for the right competing, p=0.155 for the left competing, p=0.066 for the left noncompeting, p=0.174 for the total score, and p=0.701 for the reversals). Significant differences were observed in the main scores of P-DOM test among the age groups. The Spearman test showed a high test-retest reliability (r>0.69).
Conclusion: As a preliminary study it seems that the P-DOM has good validity and reliability to be used in normal-hearing children, but it needs further research with larger sample size.
 Tillery KL. Central Auditory Processing Evaluation: A Test Battery Approach. In: Katz J, Chasin M, English K, Hood LJ, Tillery KL, editors. Handbook of clinical audiology. 7th ed. Baltimore: Wolters Kluwer Health; 2015. p. 545-60.
 Quigley M, Cordes D, Turski P, Moritz C, Haughton V, Seth R, et al. Role of the corpus callosum in functional connectivity. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;24(2):208-12.
 Delphi M, Zamiri Abdollahi F. Dichotic training in children with auditory processing disorder. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;110:114-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.05.014]
 Musiek FE, Weihing J. Perspectives on dichotic listening and the corpus callosum. Brain Cogn. 2011;76(2):225-32. [DOI:10.1016/j.bandc.2011.03.011]
 Asbjørnsen AE, Helland T. Dichotic listening performance predicts language comprehension. Laterality. 2006;11(3):251-62. [DOI:10.1080/13576500500489360]
 Westerhausen R, Woerner W, Kreuder F, Schweiger E, Hugdahl K, Wittling W. The role of the corpus callosum in dichotic listening: a combined morphological and diffusion tensor imaging study. Neuropsychology. 2006;20(3):272-9. [DOI:10.1037/0894-4188.8.131.522]
 Katz J, Chertoff M, Sawusch JR. Dichotic training. J Aud Res. 1984;24(4):251-64.
 Northern JL, Downs MP. Hearing in Childre. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002.
 Negin E, Jarollahi F, Barootiyan SS, Seyyedi F, Jalaie S, Katz J. Development, validity, reliability and normative data of the Persian Phonemic Synthesis Test (P-PST). Int J Audiol. 2020;59(3):230-5. [DOI:10.1080/14992027.2019.1688401]
 Mahdavi ME, Pourbakht A, Parand A, Jalaie S. Test-Retest Reliability and Minimal Detectable Change of Randomized Dichotic Digits in Learning-Disabled Children: Implications for Dichotic Listening Training. J Am Acad Audiol. 2018;29(3):223-32. [DOI:10.3766/jaaa.16134]
 Martins JH, Alves M, Andrade S, Falé I, Teixeira A. Auditory Processing Disorder Test Battery in European Portuguese-Development and Normative Data for Pediatric Population. Audiol Res. 2021;11(3):474-90. [DOI:10.3390/audiolres11030044]
|Issue||Vol 32 No 2 (2023)|
|Auditory processing dichotic offset measure dichotic listening integration deficit|
|Rights and permissions|
|This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|