Accuracy of an internet-based speech-in-noise hearing screening test for high-frequency hearing loss: incorporating automatic conditional rescreening
International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, ISSN: 0340-0131, Vol: 91, Issue: 7, Page: 877-885
2018
- 5Citations
- 35Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations5
- Citation Indexes5
- Captures35
- Readers35
- 35
Article Description
Purpose: To validate the accuracy of an internet-based speech-in-noise hearing screening test for high-frequency hearing loss (HFHL) ‘Occupational Earcheck (OEC)’ incorporating an automatic conditional rescreening, in an occupationally noise-exposed population. Secondary objectives were to assess the effects of age on test accuracy measures, and to assess the test accuracy for different degrees of HFHL. Methods: A study was conducted on cross-sectional data of occupational audiometric examinations, including the index test OEC and reference standard pure-tone air conduction audiometry, of 80 noise-exposed workers. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios were calculated for the OEC, after automatic conditional rescreening, for a younger and an older age group, and for two degrees of HFHL (HFHL: PTA3,4,6 ≥ 25 dB HL, and HFHL: PTA3,4,6 ≥ 35 dB HL, both for at least one ear). Results: Test specificity for HFHL after a single test was 63%, and improved to 93% after the automatic conditional rescreen. Test sensitivity for HFHL decreased from 65% to 59%. Test sensitivity and specificity including automatic conditional rescreening for HFHL was 94% and 90%, respectively. The positive likelihood ratio for HFHL was 8.4, and for HFHL 9.4. The negative likelihood ratio for HFHL was below 0.1. Conclusions: The OEC is an appropriate screening test, especially for HFHL. Normal-hearing workers who obtained a positive test result for the first test for one or two ears, benefit from having an automatic rescreen, resulting in an improvement of the test specificity, and hence prevent unnecessary referral.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85049135565&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00420-018-1332-5; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29959525; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00420-018-1332-5; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00420-018-1332-5; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00420-018-1332-5
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know