APilotStudy:DevelopingMalaySpeechAudiometryMaterialsfor
ClinicalUseinSingaporeNadiahAbdulKhalil(A0147713E)
Supervisor:Dr.JennyLoo
Introduction◦ SpeechAudiometry:Clinicaltoolthatusesspeechstimulitoassessanindividual’shearingabilities(Boothroyd,1968).◦ ShouldbedevelopedinlanguagesotherthanEnglish(Carhart,1952).◦ Usingspeechmaterialsinalanguageunfamiliartotheindividualwillresultinnegativeclinicalimplications(Marinova-Todd,SiuandJenstad,2011).
MalaySpeechAudiometry◦ TwodevelopmentsofspeechaudiometrymaterialsinMalaysianMalay◦ Yiap KimHong,1984◦Mukari &Said,1991◦ UncertainifwordsareasappropriateorfamiliarfortheSingaporeMalaycommunity◦ UncertainifthepronunciationofthewordsaresimilartothatofSingaporeMalay
◦MalaySpeechAudiometryMaterialsbyTemasek Polytechnic&CGH◦ TACWordList◦ Unpublishedpilotstudy◦ Familiarbutpoorqualityofwordrecordings
AimofCurrentStudy
◦ToestablishMalayspeechaudiometrymaterialsforclinicaluseinSingapore.
Hypothesis:MalayspeechaudiometrymaterialscanbeusedindeterminingnormativedatafortheMalay
populationinSingapore.
Procedure
Phase1Validationof
WordFamiliarity
Phase2RecordingandEditingofSingapore
MalaySpeechMaterials
Phase3AdministrationofSingaporeMalaySpeechMaterials
Phase4Test-RetestReliability
Phase1:ValidationofWordFamiliarity◦ ComparethefamiliarityoftheMukari &Said(1991)andTACwordlists
◦ Bothwordlistscontainedbisyllabicwords
◦ 20randomMalay-speakingSingaporeanadultsaged23-75yearsold
◦ TACwordlistmorefamiliar◦ 7/100wordshaddifferentphonemicstructure
C-V-C-V-C
PasarLapan
Cinta
Minta
WarnaKurma
Tukar
C-V-C-VCikuRomaMajuGuniGusiDaguJamu
Phase2:RecordingandEditing◦ NewSingaporeMalaywordlist◦ Recorded100MalaywordsatYST◦ SingaporeanMale◦ NativefluencyinMalay◦ Rawrecordingsedited◦ 10CDtracks/listsof10words◦ 2secs intervalbetweeneachword◦ 1kHzcalibrationtone
Phase3:AdministeringMalaySpeechAudiometry
◦ 41Participants◦ Basichearingassessment◦ Determine:◦ PureToneAverage(PTA:500,1k,2kHz)◦ SpeechReceptionThreshold(SRT)◦ WordRecognitionScore(WRS)
◦ WRSatonesuprathreshold level:PTA+50dBHLforall10lists
Phase4:DeterminingTest-RetestReliability
◦ RepeatWRStesting◦ Identifyhigh-errorratewords
WordScoring
PhonemicScoring
Results
◦PTA-SRTDifference◦AveragedifferencebetweenPTAandSRT=5.96dB◦6dBdifferenceindicatesagoodagreementbetweenPTAandSRT(Brandy,2002)
Results◦ HighError-RateWords◦ Higherrorrate:Inaccuratelyidentifiedby20%oftheparticipantsinbothtestandretest◦ Noneofthe100wordsyieldedahigherror-rate.
Word FrequencyofErrorN,(%)
List ErroneousResponse
Rayu 1,(2.4) 1 “Layu”
Suka 1,(2.4) 1 “Suke”
Tali 4,(9.8) 5 “Kali”(4)
Goda 3,(7.3) 5 “Kuda”,”Koda”(2)
Gaya 1,(2.4) 6 “Daya”
Desa 1,(2.4) 7 “Desal”
Word FrequencyofErrorN,(%)
List ErroneousResponse
Jamu 1,(2.4) 8 “Jangu”
Roma 2,(4.9) 8 “Rumah”
Bila 2,(4.9) 9 “Bile”
Ciku8,(19.5) 10 “Tiku”(3),
“Tigu”,“Kiku”(3),“Piku”
Dahi 1,(2.4) 10 “Dalhi”
Ilmu 1,(2.4) 10 “Demu”
Word FrequencyofErrorN,(%)
List ErroneousResponse
Jamu 1,(2.4) 8 “Jangu”
Roma 2,(4.9) 8 “Rumah”
Bila 2,(4.9) 9 “Bile”
Ciku8,(19.5) 10 “Tiku”(3),
“Tigu”,“Kiku”(3),“Piku”
Dahi 1,(2.4) 10 “Dalhi”
Ilmu 1,(2.4) 10 “Demu”
Results
◦Test-RetestReliability◦Medium-LargecorrelationstrengthbetweentestandretestWRSusingbothmethodofwordscoringandphonemicscoring◦ Correlationcoefficientsunattainableforlists2,3and4◦ All41subjectsscored100%oneitherorbothtestandretest
Results
◦WordScoringvs.PhonemicScoring◦ Phonemicscoringprovidesamoresensitivemeasureofthespeechrecognitioncurve(Markides,1978)◦ Bisyllabicwords: Greaternumberofphonemes–>Greaterlikelihoodofidentificationerror◦ Significantdifferencewhenphonemicscoringwasusedonlists5,8and10◦ Listscontainunfamiliarwordsandwordswithhighererrorrate◦ Phonemicscoringshouldbeusedfortheselists
◦ Nosignificantdifferenceinmethodofscoringonotherlists
Discussion◦ Outcome:ThedevelopedSingaporeMalaywordlistsdeemedappropriateforuseonnormal-hearingsample.◦ UseofMalaysianorTACmaterialsinappropriate◦ Nohigherror-ratewords◦ Inaccuraterepetitions◦ Pronunciationofstimuliinacolloquial/informalmanner◦ Lackoffamiliarity◦ 12subjectsreportedunfamiliarwithatleast1word
◦ Qualityofrecording◦ Misunderstandingofinstructions◦ Fatigue
Formal“Suka”“Bila”
Informal“Suke”“Bile”
Limitations
1. Malaylanguageproficiencyscreening◦ PrimarylanguageofMalay
2. SRTdetermination◦ GoldStandard◦ Phonemicscoring
3. Durationofintervalbetweentestandretest◦ Onemonthsuggestedduration
FutureStudies
◦Wordlistsshouldbetestedonsubjectswithvaryingdegreesofhearingloss.◦Performance-intensitycurvesshouldbedevelopedusingbothnormalhearingandhearing-impairedsubjects.◦Establishlarge-scalenormativedatafortheMalaypopulationinSingapore.
ReferencesBoothroyd, A.(1968).Developments inspeechaudiometry. InternationalAudiology,7(3),368-368.
doi:10.3109/05384916809074343Brandy,W.T.(2002).Speechaudiometry. InJ.Katz(Ed.),Handbookofclinicalaudiology,5,596-110.
Baltimore:LippincottWilliams&Wilkins.Carhart,R.(1952).Speechaudiometry inclinicalevaluation.Acta Otolaryngol,41(1-2),18-48.Marinova-Todd, S.H,*Siu,C.,&Jenstad,L.(2011)Speechaudiometryonnon-nativespeakersof
English. Canadian JournalofSpeech-LanguagePathologyandAudiology,35(3),220-227.Markides,A.(1978)Whole-wordscoringversusphonemicscoring inspeechaudiometry.BritishJournalof
Audiology,12(2),40-46.Mukari,S.Z.&Said,H.(1991).ThedevelopmentofMalayspeechaudiometry.MedJMalaysia,46(3),262-
268.Yiap,K.H.(1984).DisyllabicMalaywordlistsforspeechaudiometry.MedJMalaysia,39(3),197-204.
Acknowledgements◦ Dr.JennyLoo◦ ProfWilliamMartin◦ Dr.JenniferMartin◦ EdmundChoo◦ SebastianSer◦ ZhouXiaodong◦ ConradChung◦ LimShermin◦ Participants◦ ClassofMScAudiology2017
Terima Kasih!
Top Related