MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413270122 · doi:10.3766/jaaa.240041

Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of Sound Sensitivity Symptoms Questionnaire: A Screening Measure for Hyperacusis and Misophonia

2025· article· en· W4413270122 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Rasouli, Vida Rahimi, Farzaneh Fatahi, Ronak Mohammadi, Hashir Aazh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperacusisAudiologyTinnitusMeasure (data warehouse)PsychologyMedicineAudiometryHearing lossComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Sound tolerance issues impact daily activities. Questionnaires effectively assess symptoms and severity of sound intolerance. The Sound Sensitivity Symptoms Questionnaire (SSSQ) is a brief five-item tool designed to evaluate the severities of sound sensitivity and screen different forms of sound sensitivity. Purpose: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the SSSQ (P-SSSQ) among adults with a pure-tone average no greater than 20 dB HL without tinnitus symptoms. Research Design: A cross-sectional survey was conducted. The questionnaire was translated using the International Quality of Life Assessment method. The content validity ratio (CVR) and content validity index (CVI) were determined. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), receiver-operating characteristic curve, internal consistency, and test‐retest reliability were established. Convergent and discriminant validity were assessed. Study Sample: A total of 100 adults (48 women) from the general population with and without sound sensitivity participated in the study. Data Collection and Analysis: Internal consistency was evaluated using the Cronbach α and McDonald omega coefficients. Test‐retest reliability was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) after a 2-week interval. Convergent and discriminant validity were assessed using the Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients. Result: The CVR and CVI of the questionnaire were excellent. The CFA confirmed a single-factor structure, consistent with the original English version. Internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach α = 0.75; McDonald omega = 0.79). Test‐retest reliability was excellent, with an ICC of 0.92. Convergent validity was supported by moderate correlations with the Hyperacusis Questionnaire ( r = 0.571) scores, Misophonia Questionnaire ( r = 0.453) scores, and uncomfortable loudness levels ( r = −0.652). Discriminant validity was demonstrated by a weak correlation with PTA across ears ( r = 0.175). Conclusions: The P-SSSQ is a reliable and valid tool that can quickly assess sound sensitivity symptoms with its single-factor structure and satisfactory model fit. It can be used as a checklist to evaluate various types and severities of sound sensitivity as well as to monitor treatment progress in audiology, otolaryngology, and psychology clinics. A score greater than 4 indicates sound sensitivity with 79 percent sensitivity and 82 percent specificity. Correlations with other questionnaires suggest overlapping sensitivities; therefore, the P-SSSQ is valuable for comprehensively classifying sound sensitivity.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of AudiologySame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207