Speech perception in noise: Exploring the effect of linguistic context in children with and without auditory processing disorder
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate whether the speech perception problems in noise of children with auditory processing disorder (APD) stem from an auditory or a higher order dysfunction. DESIGN: A repeated measures design comparing the sentence key word recognition scores of children with APD and a control group was used. Four sentence lists from the Test de phrases dans le bruit (TPB) were presented with a babble masker at four different signal-to-noise ratios. The TPB is a Canadian French adaptation of the speech perception in noise test. STUDY SAMPLE: Ten participants between 9-12 years with APD participated in this study, as well as ten age- and gender-matched children with no sign of APD. RESULTS: Group analyses revealed that children with APD had poorer overall sentence key word recognition scores than the control group. Analysis of the difference scores between the high and low predictability sentences indicated that the benefit derived from linguistic context is similar between the groups. However, individual patterns of results revealed different profiles within the APD group. CONCLUSION: Further study using a larger sample is warranted to deepen our understanding of the nature of APD and identify characteristic profiles to enable better tailoring of therapeutic programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it