On Diagnostic Accuracy in Audiology: Central Site of Lesion and Central Auditory Processing Disorder Studies

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (02) ◽  
pp. 141-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Vermiglio

Background: In the field of audiology a test protocol (index test) is used to determine the presence or absence of a target condition. The value of an index test rests in its diagnostic accuracy. Results from an index test must be verified through the use of a reference standard. The clinician and researcher should determine the quality and applicability of diagnostic accuracy studies. The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) statement was published in response to the low quality of research conducted across many fields of study. It provides guidelines for the development and interpretation of diagnostic accuracy studies. Purpose: The primary purpose of this article is to assess the degree to which the main principles of diagnostic accuracy studies are used for the detection of central auditory nervous system lesions and a central auditory processing disorder (CAPD). The secondary purpose is to compare the design of these studies to select key guidelines from the STARD statement. The third purpose of this article is to present an argument against the reassignment of diagnostic accuracy values of a particular index test for one target condition (e.g., a central site of lesion) to a different target condition (e.g., a CAPD). Results: A review of diagnostic accuracy literature on the detection of a central site of lesion reveals the use of a reference standard for the independent verification of the index test results. However, diagnostic accuracy studies involving index tests for the detection of a CAPD show that independent verification of index test results is nonexistent or at best questionable. Conclusion: For a particular index test, while the diagnostic accuracy for detection of a central site of lesion may have been determined appropriately, it is inappropriate to reassign these diagnostic accuracy values to a different diagnostic target such as a CAPD.

Author(s):  
Ahmadreza Nazeri ◽  
Houra Bagheri ◽  
Alireza Akbarzadeh Baghban ◽  
Ehsan Negin

Background and Aim: Amblyaudia is a diag­nostic issue in central auditory processing disor­der (CAPD), which is characterized by asymme­try in dichotic listening performance. This disor­der negatively affects the academic performance of children by influencing their information pro­cessing, reading, attention, etc. The present study aimed to investigate the effect of the dichotic interaural intensity difference (DIID) training on all auditory processing categories of the Buffalo Model using the Persian staggered spondaic word (P-SSW) test. Methods: The study was conducted on 17 chil­dren (11 girls and 6 boys) aged 8−12 years old diagnosed with amblyaudia. All children were first evaluated by the P-SSW test, and then parti­cipated in 10−12 sessions of the DIID training. The P-SSW test was taken again after completing the training program in order to evaluate the training effect. Results: The paired t-test results showed a sig­nificant reduction in the mean scores of decoding (p < 0.001) and tolerance fading memory (p < 0.004) categories as well as the total mean score of P-SSW test after training. The Wilcoxon test also showed the effect of this training on the integration category (p < 0.025). The McNemar test, however, showed no statistically significant effect of the DIID training on the organization category. Conclusion: The DIID training causes signifi­cant improvement in some central auditory pro­cessing categories of the Buffalo Model, inclu­ding decoding, tolerance fading memory and integration. Keywords: Dichotic interaural intensity difference; central auditory processing disorder; amblyaudia


2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony T. Cacace ◽  
Dennis J. McFarland

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