RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Comparing Phoneme and Word Recognition Test Outcomes in Adult CI users: Data Analysis from the AuDieT Study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.03.28.24304843
DO 10.1101/2024.03.28.24304843
A1 Migliorini, Enrico
A1 Wasmann, Jan-Willem A.
A1 Philpott, Nikki
A1 van Dijk, Bastiaan
A1 Philips, Birgit
A1 Huinck, Wendy
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/03/29/2024.03.28.24304843.abstract
AB Purpose Current clinical measures used in cochlear implantation (CI) provide a broader view of speech recognition ability at word-level, often missing granular details contained at phoneme-level that may be valuable for CI mapping. This study evaluates how outcomes of Phoneme Recognition in Quiet tests (PRQ) differ from those of more commonly used word recognition tests (CVC) and outlines how these tests may be useful for different purposes in clinical adult CI care.Methods As part of the AuDiET (Auditory Diagnostics and Error-based Treatment) study, 23 adult postlingually deafened unilateral CI users underwent a battery of tests, including both PRQ and CVC tests. Their results were compared at the phoneme level, including an evaluation of fitness and error dispersion.Results PRQ had a significantly lower accuracy and fitness than CVC. The error patterns also tended to be less random and more systematic. Fitness correlated strongly and positively with accuracy, while error dispersion negatively correlated with accuracy.Conclusion There are clear differences between PRQ and CVC outcomes in absolute accuracy and error distribution. Comparing these tests might provide clinicians with more granular insights into which areas/phonemes to target during mapping, to achieve optimal speech recognition.Competing Interest StatementEnrico Migliorini, Bastiaan van Dijk and Birgit Philips are employed by Cochlear Limited.Clinical TrialNCT05307952Funding StatementEnrico Migliorini's PhD programme is MOSAICS; MOSAICS is a European Industrial Doctorate project funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 framework programme for research and innovation under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Grant Agreement No. 860718.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was submitted to the Radboudumc ethical committee (METC), where it was approved and assessed as not falling under the jurisdiction of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) (NL-number: NL80521.091.22)I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe data produced in the present study is not available at the moment.