Outcome measures for hearing rehabilitation strategies in children are the subject of endless debate. The underlying problem with measuring outcomes in this population is delineating the extent to which development (which is in itself variable) and hearing ability (usually the variable we want to assess) affect the recorded outcomes, such as development of speech and even speech identification. The outcome measures that are most commonly used are the ‘Categories of Auditory Perception’ and ‘Speech Intelligibility Ratio’. Whilst these measures are frequently criticised for their limitations, they have the advantage of being easily applied. The volume of scientific literature, originating from Mandarin speakers, continues to increase. In this context, the importance of being able to draw meaningful comparisons between articles reporting outcomes from English and Mandarin speakers is increasingly important. Using the same outcome measures is a key part of being able to draw interesting comparisons. Another interesting aspect of comparing outcomes from cochlear implantation between English and Mandarin speakers is the impact of tonal language (Mandarin), which is relatively more reliant on low frequency stimulation. This article shows measures of CAP and SIR in 191 children with impressively high inter-rater and test-retest reliability. It is no surprise that criterion validity was very high. The normative values provided will be useful in assessing and comparing volumes of cochlear implant research on Mandarin speakers.
CI outcome measures and different languages
Reviewed by Robert Nash
Validation of the Mandarin versions of CAP and SIR.
CONTRIBUTOR
Robert Nash
BM BCh, MA(Oxon), MRCS, MA, DOHNS, FRCS (ORL-HNS), Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK.
View Full Profile
