Impact of Hearing Loss and Amplification on Performance on a Cognitive Screening Test
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: There have been numerous recent reports on the association between hearing impairment and cognitive function, such that the cognition of adults with hearing loss is poorer relative to the cognition of adults with normal hearing (NH), even when amplification is used. However, it is not clear the extent to which this is testing artifact due to the individual with hearing loss being unable to accurately hear the test stimuli. PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this study was to examine whether use of amplification during cognitive screening with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) improves performance on the MoCA. Secondarily, we investigated the effects of hearing ability on MoCA performance, by comparing the performance of individuals with and without hearing impairment. STUDY SAMPLE: Participants were 42 individuals with hearing impairment and 19 individuals with NH. Of the individuals with hearing impairment, 22 routinely used hearing aids; 20 did not use hearing aids. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Following a written informec consent process, all participants completed pure tone audiometry, speech testing in quiet (Maryland consonant-nucleus-consonant [CNC] words) and in noise (Quick Speech in Noise [QuickSIN] test), and the MoCA. The speech testing and MoCA were completed twice. Individuals with hearing impairment completed testing once unaided and once with amplification, whereas individuals with NH completed unaided testing twice. RESULTS: The individuals with hearing impairment performed significantly less well on the MoCA than those without hearing impairment for unaided testing, and the use of amplification did not significantly change performance. This is despite the finding that amplification significantly improved the performance of the hearing aid users on the measures of speech in quiet and speech in noise. Furthermore, there were strong correlations between MoCA score and the four frequency pure tone average, Maryland CNC score and QuickSIN, which remain moderate to strong when the analyses were adjusted for age. CONCLUSIONS: It is concluded that the individuals with hearing loss here performed less well on the MoCA than individuals with NH and that the use of amplification did not compensate for this performance deficit. Nonetheless, this should not be taken to suggest the use of amplification during testing is unnecessary because it might be that other unmeasured factors, such as effort required to perform or fatigue, were decreased with the use of amplification.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».