Evaluation of the American English Matrix Test with Cochlear Implant Recipients

References

• Auditec Inc. 2022. Four-Talker Noise©. https://auditec.com/2015/09/22/four-talkers/
   Google Scholar
• Auditory Potential LLC. 2011. Minimum Speech Test Battery (MSTB) for Adult Cochlear Implant Users. http://www.auditorypotential.com/MSTBfiles/MSTBManual2011-06-20%20.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Bench, J., A. Kowal, and J. Bamford. 1979. “The BKB (Bamford-Kowal-Bench) Sentence Lists for Partially-Hearing Children.” British Journal of Audiology 13 (3): 108–112. doi:10.3109/03005367909078884.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dietz, A., M. Buschermöhle, A. A. Aarnisalo, A. Vanhanen, T. Hyyrynen, O. Aaltonen, H. Löppönen, M. A. Zokoll, and B. Kollmeier. 2014. “The Development and Evaluation of the Finnish Matrix Sentence Test for Speech Intelligibility Assessment.” Acta Oto-Laryngologica 134 (7): 728–737. doi:10.3109/00016489.2014.898185.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dietz, A., M. Buschermöhle, V. Sivonen, T. Willberg, A. A. Aarnisalo, T. Lenarz, and B. Kollmeier. 2015. “Characteristics and International Comparability of the Finnish Matrix Sentence Test in Cochlear Implant Recipients.” International Journal of Audiology 54 (Suppl 2): 80–87. doi:10.3109/14992027.2015.1070309.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gifford, R. H., J. K. Shallop, and A. M. Peterson. 2008. “Speech Recognition Materials and Ceiling Effects: Considerations for Cochlear Implant Programs.” Audiology & Neuro-Otology 13 (3): 193–205. doi:10.1159/000113510.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harianawala, J., J. Galster, and B. Hornsby. 2019. “Psychometric Comparison of the Hearing in Noise Test and the American English Matrix Test.” Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 30 (4): 315–326. doi:10.3766/jaaa.17112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hey, M., T. Hocke, J. Hedderich, and J. Müller-Deile. 2014. “Investigation of a Matrix Sentence Test in Noise: Reproducibility and Discrimination Function in Cochlear Implant Patients.” International Journal of Audiology 53 (12): 895–902. doi:10.3109/14992027.2014.938368.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochmuth, S., T. Brand, M. A. Zokoll, F. Z. Castro, N. Wardenga, and B. Kollmeier. 2012. “A Spanish Matrix Sentence Test for Assessing Speech Reception Thresholds in Noise.” International Journal of Audiology 51 (7):536–544. doi:10.3109/14992027.2012.670731.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochmuth, S., B. Kollmeier, T. Brand, and T. Jürgens. 2015. “Influence of Noise Type on Speech Reception Thresholds Across Four Languages Measured with Matrix Sentence Tests.” International Journal of Audiology 54 (Suppl 2): 62–70. doi:10.3109/14992027.2015.1046502.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Houben, R., J. Koopman, H. Luts, K. C. Wagener, A. Van Wieringen, H. Verschuure, and W. A. Dreschler. 2014. “Development of a Dutch Matrix Sentence Test to Assess Speech Intelligibility in Noise.” International Journal of Audiology 53 (10): 760–763. doi:10.3109/14992027.2014.920111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HörTech gGmbH. 2014. International Matrix Test, Reliable Speech Audiometry in Noise. https://www.hoertech.de/images/hoertech/pdf/mp/Internationale-Matrixtests.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, H., X. Xi, L. L. N. Wong, S. Hochmuth, A. Warzybok, and B. Kollmeier. 2018. “Construction and Evaluation of the Mandarin Chinese Matrix (CMNmatrix) Sentence Test for the Assessment of Speech Recognition in Noise.” International Journal of Audiology 57 (11): 838–850. doi:10.1080/14992027.2018.1483083.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen, S., H. Luts, K. C. Wagener, B. Kollmeier, M. Del Rio, R. Dauman, C. James, et al. 2012. “Comparison of Three Types of French Speech-in-Noise Tests: A Multi-Center Study.” International Journal of Audiology 51 (3): 164–173. doi:10.3109/14992027.2011.633568.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollmeier, B., A. Warzybok, S. Hochmuth, M. A. Zokoll, V. Uslar, T. Brand, and K. C. Wagener. 2015. “The Multilingual Matrix Test: Principles, Applications, and Comparison Across Languages: A Review.” International Journal of Audiology 54 (Suppl 2): 3–16. doi:10.3109/14992027.2015.1020971.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luxford, W. M. 2001. “Minimum Speech Test Battery for Postlingually Deafened Adult Cochlear Implant Patients.” Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery 124 (2): 125–126. doi:10.1067/mhn.2001.113035.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsson, M., S. D. Soli, and J. A. Sullivan. 1994. “Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the Measurement of Speech Reception Thresholds in Quiet and in Noise.” The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 95 (2): 1085–1099. doi:10.1121/1.408469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuesse, T., B. Wiercinski, T. Brand, and I. Holube. 2019. “Measuring Speech Recognition with a Matrix Test using Synthetic Speech.” Trends in Hearing 23: 233121651986298. doi:10.1177/2331216519862982.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozimek, E., A. Warzybok, and D. Kutzner. 2010. “Polish Sentence Matrix Test for Speech Intelligibility Measurement in Noise.” International Journal of Audiology 49 (6): 444–454. doi:10.3109/14992021003681030.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, G. E., and I. Lehiste. 1962. “Revised CNC Lists for Auditory Tests.” The Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 27: 62–70. doi:10.1044/jshd.2701.62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rose, H. A. 2013. “Reliability of the American English Matrix Test.” PhD diss., Towson University. http://hdl.handle.net/11603/1949.
   Google Scholar
• Schafer, E. C., J. Pogue, and T. Milrany. 2012. “List Equivalency of the AzBio Sentence Test in Noise for Listeners with Normal-Hearing Sensitivity or Cochlear Implants.” Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 23 (7): 501–509. doi:10.3766/jaaa.23.7.2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spahr, A. J., M. F. Dorman, L. M. Litvak, S. Van Wie, R. H. Gifford, P. C. Loizou, L. M. Loiselle, T. Oakes, and S. Cook. 2012. “Development and Validation of the AzBio Sentence Lists.” Ear and Hearing 33 (1): 112–117. doi:10.1097/AUD.0b013e31822c2549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theelen-van Den Hoek, F. L., R. Houben, and W. A. Dreschler. 2014. “Investigation into the Applicability and Optimization of the Dutch Matrix Sentence Test for use with Cochlear Implant Users.” International Journal of Audiology 53 (11): 817–828. doi:10.3109/14992027.2014.922223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagener, K., J. L. Josvassen, and R. Ardenkjaer. 2003. “Design, Optimization and Evaluation of a Danish Sentence Test in Noise.” International Journal of Audiology 42 (1): 10–17. doi:10.3109/14992020309056080.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warzybok, A., M. Zokoll, N. Wardenga, E. Ozimek, M. Boboshko, and B. Kollmeier. 2015. “Development of the Russian Matrix Sentence Test.” International Journal of Audiology 54 (Suppl 2): 35–43. doi:10.3109/14992027.2015.1020969.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zirn, S., D. Polterauer, S. Keller, and W. Hemmert. 2016. “The Effect of Fluctuating Maskers on Speech Understanding of High-Performing Cochlear Implant Users.” International Journal of Audiology 55 (5): 295–304. doi:10.3109/14992027.2015.1128124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zokoll, M. A., D. Fidan, D. Türkyılmaz, S. Hochmuth, İ. Ergenç, G. Sennaroğlu, and B. Kollmeier. 2015. “Development and Evaluation of the Turkish Matrix Sentence Test.” International Journal of Audiology 54 (Suppl 2): 51–61. doi:10.3109/14992027.2015.1074735.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar