459
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Masking level difference in an adaptive procedure for clinical investigation

, , , , , & show all
Pages 613-620 | Received 12 Oct 2010, Accepted 14 Apr 2011, Published online: 01 Jul 2011
 

Abstract

Abstract

Objective: Masking level difference (MLD) tests are an established component of auditory processing test batteries; however, normative data for these tests vary according to procedure. The purpose of this study was to establish a standardized procedure for clinical use in the measurement of the MLD Design: A newly developed computer software program using both an adaptive procedure (MLDA) and a Békésy procedure (MLDB) was evaluated in this study. Study sample: Forty normal-hearing, native-English speaking adults between the ages of 18 and 26 years were included in the study. Results: Both the MLDA and MLDB procedures showed statistically significant sex differences in the masked thresholds used to obtain the MLD, but not for the calculated MLD value; hence, normative data need not be reported separately by sex. Furthermore, statistically significant differences between procedures were observed, with the MLDA procedure producing higher MLDs. The MLDA procedure permitted a d’ analysis, which could not be determined using the MLDB procedure. For MLDA, d’ = 1.4, test sensitivity = 96.4%, and test specificity = 60.3%. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that MLDA is a more efficient testing procedure due to MLDA's higher MLD average and the statistical data available (d’, and measures of sensitivity and specificity).

Sumario

Objetivo: Las pruebas de Diferencia en el Nivel de Enmascaramiento (MLD) son un componente establecido de las baterías de pruebas de procesamiento auditivo; sin embargo, los datos normativos para estas pruebas varían de acuerdo al procedimiento. Diseño: Se evaluó en este estudio un programa de computadora recientemente desarrollado que utiliza un procedimiento adaptativo (MLDA) y un procedimiento de Békésy (MLDB). Muestra del Estudio: Se incluyeron cuarenta adultos normales, hablantes naturales del inglés, en edades entre los 18 y los 26 años. Resultados: Tanto el procedimiento MLDA, como el MLDB mostraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en cuanto a género en los umbrales enmascarados usados para obtener la MLD, pero no para el valor calculado de MLD por tanto, los datos normativos no tiene que se reportados separadamente por sexo. Más aún, se observaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre los procedimientos, produciendo el MLDA niveles más altos de MLD. El procedimiento de MLDA permitió un análsis d’, que no pudo ser determinado usando el procedimiento MLDB. Para MLDA, d’ = 1.4, sensibilidad de la prueba = 96.4%, y especificidad de la prueba = 60.3%. Conclusiones: Los resultados de este estudio indican que el MLDA es un procedimiento de evaluación más eficiente debido a su MLD promedio más alto y a los datos estadísticos disponibles (d’y las medidas de sensibilidad y especificidad).

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by grants from the S.G. and B.J. Fletcher Biocommunication Endowment, the David O. McKay School of Education Mentoring Grant, and the Office of Research and Creative Works, Brigham Young University.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

NOTICE OF CORRECTION

The Early Online version of this article published online ahead of print on 01 07 2011 contained an error on page 1. One of the authors was not listed. This has been corrected for the current version.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 194.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.