Development of the Persian version of high-frequency emphasis quick speech in noise
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.
2. Lucks Mendel L, Widner H. Speech perception in noise for bilingual listeners with normal hearing. Int J Audiol. 2016;55(2):126-34. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2015.1061710
3. Theunissen M, Swanepoel de W, Hanekom J. Sentence recognition in noise: Variables in compilation and interpretation of tests. Int J Audiol. 2009;48(11):743-57. doi: 10.3109/14992020903082088
4. Taylor B. Speech-in-noise tests: How and why to include them in your basic test battery. Hear J. 2003;56(1): 40,42-46. doi: 10.1097/01.HJ.0000293000.76300
5. Killion MC. The SIN report: Circuits haven't solved the hearing-in-noise problem. Hear J. 1997;50(10): 28-30,32,34.
6. Killion MC, Niquette PA. What can the pure-tone audiogram tell us about a patient’s SNR loss. Hear J. 2000;53(3):46-53.
7. Kochkin S. MarkeTrak V: "Why my hearing aids are in the drawer": The consumers’ perspective. The Hearing Journal. 2000;53(2):34-41.
8. Nilsson M, Soli SD, Sullivan JA. Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994;95(2):1085-99.
9. Killion MC, Christensen LA. Principles of high-fidelity hearing aid amplification. In: Sandlin RE, editor. Textbook of hearing aid amplification. 2nd ed. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group Thomson Learning; 2000. p. 171-208.
10. Niquette P, Gudmundsen G, Killion M. QuickSIN Speech-in-Noise Test Version 1.3. Elk Grove Village, IL: Etymotic Research. 2001.
11. Duncan KR, Aarts NL. A comparison of the HINT and Quick SIN tests. J Speech Lang Pathol Audiol. 2006;30(2):86-94.
12. Khalili M, Fatahi J, Hajiabolhassan F, Tahaei AA, Jalaei S. Test-retest reliability and list equivalency of the Persian quick speech in noise test. MRJ. 2010;3(3-4):16-21. Persian.
13. Shayanmehr S, Tahaei AA, Fatahi J, Jalaie S, Modarresi Y. Development, validity and reliability of Persian quick speech in noise test with steady noise. Aud Vestib Res. 2015;24(4):234-44.
14. Hanilou J, Fatahi J, Tahaei AA, Jalaie S. List equivalency of the Persian quick speech in noise test on hearing impaired subjects. Aud Vestib Res. 2016;25(1):7-13.
15. Moossavi A, Javanbakht M, Arbab Sarjoo H, Bakhsh E, Mahmoodi Bakhtiari B, Lotfi Y. Development and psychometric evaluation of Persian version of the quick speech in noise test in Persian speaking 18-25 years old normal adults. Journal of Rehabilitation Sciences and Research. 2016;3(3):51-6.
16. McArdle RA, Wilson RH. Homogeneity of the 18 QuickSIN™ lists. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology. 2006;17(3):157-67. doi; 10.3766/jaaa.17.3.2
17. Carhart R, Jerger JF. Preferred method for clinical determination of pure-tone thresholds. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1959;24(4):330-45. doi: 10.1044/jshd.2404.330
18. Killion MC, Niquette PA, Gudmundsen GI, Revit LJ, Banerjee S. Development of a quick speech-in-noise test for measuring signal-to-noise ratio loss in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am. 2004;116(4 Pt 1):2395-405.
19. Aiken LR. Content validity and reliability of single items or questionnaires. Educational and psychological measurement. 1980;40(4):955-9. doi: 10.1177/001316448004000419
20. Vojnoviü M, Subotiü M. Specifiþnosti QiuckSIN testa za srpski jezik. Telekomunikacioni forum TELFOR. 2010;23-5:1033-6.
21. Gheissi E, Fatahi J, Farahani S, Jalaie S, Tahaei AA. Test-retest reliability and list equivalency of Persian quick speech in noise test in Azari-Persian bilinguals. Aud Vestib Res. 2017;26(3):157-62.
22. Calais LL, Russo IC, Borges AC. Performance of elderly in a speech in noise test. Pro Fono. 2008;20(3):147-53.
|Issue||Vol 28 No 3 (2019)|
|Equivalency; normal hearing; quick speech-in-noise test; reliability; signal to noise ratio loss|
|Rights and permissions|
|This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|