MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989205091 · doi:10.3109/14992027.2011.553204

Speech perception in noise: Exploring the effect of linguistic context in children with and without auditory processing disorder

2011· article· en· W1989205091 on OpenAlexaffabout
Josée Lagacé, Benoı̂t Jutras, Christian Giguère, Jean‐Pierre Gagné

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Audiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeech perceptionSentenceContext (archaeology)PsychologyAudiologyPerceptionNoise (video)Linguistic contextWord recognitionLinguisticsMedicineComputer scienceLinguistic analysisArtificial intelligenceReading (process)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.SumarioObjetivo: El objetivo de este estudio fue investigar cuándo los problemas de percepción del habla en ruido, en niños con trastornos del procesamiento auditivo (APD), son producto de una disfunción auditiva o de niveles superiores. Diseño: Repetición de mediciones para comparar las puntuaciones de reconocimiento de palabras clave en una oración, entre niños con APD y los de un grupo control. Estudio: Se presentaron cuatro listas de oraciones del Test de Phrases dans le Bruit (TPB – Prueba de frases en ruido-) en presencia de balbuceo enmascarante, a cuatro diferentes relaciones señal/ruido. El TPB es una adaptación al Francés del Canadá, de la prueba de Percepción del Habla en Ruido. Muestra: Participaron en este estudio diez niños con APD entre 9-12 años y 10 niños sin signos de APD, pareados por edad y sexo. Resultados: El análisis de grupos reveló que los niños con APD tienen puntuaciones generales más pobres en el reconocimiento de palabras clave en oraciones, que los del grupo control. El análisis de las diferencias entre las puntuaciones de las oraciones de mayor o menor predictabilidad, indicaron que el beneficio que se deriva del contexto lingüístico es similar entre los dos grupos. Sin embargo, los patrones de resultados individuales, revelan diferentes perfiles en el grupo de niños con APD. Conclusiones: Se justifican estudios adicionales usando una muestra más amplia, para profundizar nuestro conocimiento sobre la naturaleza de los APD y para identificar perfiles característicos que nos permitan la mejor individualización de programas terapéuticos.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of AudiologySame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207