(Central) Auditory Processing Disorders: Issues and Challenges in India

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-63
Author(s):  
Anuradha R. Bantwal
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Linguistic Diversity ◽  
Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Central Auditory Processing ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Unique Challenge ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorders ◽  
Significant Interest ◽  
Complete Test ◽  
Auditory Processes

Abstract Individuals with (Central) Auditory Processing Disorder, or (C)APD, form a heterogeneous group. The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association has listed the auditory processes that could be assessed to enable diagnosis of (C)APD. In India, detailed audiological assessment and intervention for auditory processing problems is being conducted in relatively few centers. The linguistic diversity of India presents with a unique challenge in providing clinical services and having complete test batteries in all spoken languages. In recent years, (C)APD has generated significant interest among speech and hearing professionals in India, with several leading institutes making efforts toward filling various lacunae in this area.

Modality Specificity as a Criterion for Diagnosing Central Auditory Processing Disorders

1995 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 36-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis J. McFarland ◽  
Anthony T. Cacace
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Sensory Processing ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Central Auditory Processing ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Specific Nature ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorders ◽  
Modality Specificity ◽  
Rule Out

A central "auditory" processing disorder (CAPD) is an auditory perceptual dysfunction that cannot be explained on the basis of peripheral hearing loss. As a concept, CAPD has not been completely validated, and many issues continue to be controversial. A primary issue of concern is whether currently used tests to evaluate CAPD are sensitive to factors that are not of an auditory perceptual nature. In this paper, we consider the case for modality specificity as a criterion for improving the specificity of diagnosing CAPD. Demonstrating the modality-specific nature of sensory processing deficits is one way to rule out nonperceptual factors as explanations for observed dysfunction.

scholarly journals Impact of different cutoff criteria on rate of (central) auditory processing disorders diagnosis using the central test battery

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohsin Ahmed Shaikh ◽  
Lisa Fox-Thomas ◽  
Denise Tucker
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Processing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Test Battery ◽  
Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Central Auditory Processing ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorders ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Test Failure ◽  
Cutoff Criteria

The purpose of this study was to quantify how the use of two different cutoff criteria affects the test failure rate and potential diagnosis of central auditory processing disorder ([C]APD) in a sample of children subjected to central auditory processing ([C]AP) assessment. Test failure rates for the central test battery (CTB) using two different cutoff criteria (1 and 2 SDs below the mean) were measured retrospectively for 98 children who completed (C)AP assessment. The rates of potential (C)APD diagnosis ranged from 86.8% [when a 1 standard deviation (SD) cutoff was used] to 66.2% (when a 2 SD cutoff was used). The current use of two different cutoffs for the CTB has a large impact on the diagnostic rate for (C)APD. These findings have clinical implications for the diagnosis of (C)APD due to the widespread use of the CTB in the United States for the assessment of (C)APD in children. Thus, it is important to create awareness among audiologists that use of the 2 SDs cutoff criterion is recommended for reducing false positives (error).

scholarly journals Estimation of the referral rate of suspected cases of central auditory processing disorders in children aged 8-12 years old in Oshnavieh, Western Iran, based on auditory processing domain questionnaire and speech in noise and dichotic digit tests

2018 ◽  
pp. 164-170
Author(s):  
Arezou Moloudi ◽  
Masoumeh Rouzbahani ◽  
Nariman Rahbar ◽  
Hasan Saneie
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Referral Rate ◽  
Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Learning Problems ◽  
Central Auditory Processing ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorders ◽  
School Aged Children ◽  
Speech In Noise ◽  
Noise Test

Background and Aim: Studies have shown that central auditory processing disorder is a sensory processing deficit which has five percent prevalence among school-aged children that results in speech, language and learning problems in children. The aim of the current study was investigating the referral rate of children suspected to central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) by using auditory processing domain questionnaire (APDQ), speech in noise test, and dichotic digit test.Methods: Three hundred and ninety six APDQ questionnaire was obtained from children’s parents among five schools in Oshnaviyeh. The children with low APDQ score underwent speech in noise and dichotic digit test (DDT).Results: The findings revealed that 37 children were suspected to CAPD based on APDQ. 35 of these participants in DDT and 24 of them in speech in noise test also indicated low scores, respectively. Moreover, results were unrelated to gender, however, age had a positive correlation with the questionnaire scores.Conclusion: Based on the findings, the APDQ can be used as a screening questionnaire for detecting CAPD.

The Importance of Modality Specificity in Diagnosing Central Auditory Processing Disorder

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony T. Cacace ◽  
Dennis J. McFarland
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Large Body ◽  
Critical Discussion ◽  
Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Central Auditory Processing ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Scientific Disciplines ◽  
Modality Specificity

Purpose: This article argues for the use of modality specificity as a unifying framework by which to conceptualize and diagnose central auditory processing disorder (CAPD). The intent is to generate dialogue and critical discussion in this area of study. Method: Research in the cognitive, behavioral, and neural sciences that relates to the concept of modality specificity was reviewed and synthesized. Results: Modality specificity has a long history as an organizing construct within a diverse collection of mainstream scientific disciplines. The principle of modality specificity was contrasted with the unimodal inclusive framework, which holds that auditory tests alone are sufficient to make the CAPD diagnosis. Evidence from a large body of data demonstrated that the unimodal framework was unable to delineate modality-specific processes from more generalized dysfunction; it lacked discriminant validity and resulted in an incomplete assessment. Consequently, any hypothetical model resulting from incomplete assessments or potential therapies that are based on indeterminate diagnoses are themselves questionable, and caution should be used in their application. Conclusions: Improving specificity of diagnosis is an imperative core issue to the area of CAPD. Without specificity, the concept has little explanatory power. Because of serious flaws in concept and design, the unimodal inclusive framework should be abandoned in favor of a more valid approach that uses modality specificity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document