Validating a Quick Spectral Modulation Detection Task.
David M Landsberger, Robert T Dwyer, Natalia Stupak and 1 others
PMID 31033635WHAT IT FOUND
In 20 cochlear implant users, the new EasyQSMD task gave scores that did not differ significantly from the old QSMD(MySound) task.
Key findings
01The two software versions produced correlated spectral modulation detection scores in 20 cochlear implant users (r=0.965, p<0.00001).
02The paired comparison showed no significant difference between the tests, and the 95% confidence interval for the difference was -1.229 to 2.101.
03EasyQSMD recorded an average run duration of 3:47, with a standard deviation of 40 seconds.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 20 cochlear implant users were tested, so the result says little about other hearing populations or about treatment decisions. The study did not report speech recognition scores in the present experiment. A no-difference result does not prove the tests are identical; the 95% confidence interval for the difference was -1.229 to 2.101. QSMD(MySound) did not record run duration, so the timing comparison was incomplete.
Declared interests
No conflict-of-interest statement is included in the supplied text. The publication types list NIH extramural and non-U.S. government research support.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the no significant difference as evidence that EasyQSMD improves clinical outcomes. It only showed that the new software produced scores that did not differ significantly from the old software in 20 cochlear implant users.