Cargando…

Lists of monosyllables for logoaudiometric tests: elaboration, content validation and search for equivalence

PURPOSE: Develop new lists of monosyllables for conducting logoaudiometric tests in Portuguese, perform content validation, considering ear side and education and check the equivalence between the lists. METHODS: Were selected 125 monosyllables with different syllabic structures, which were submitte...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vaucher, Ana Valéria de Almeida, Costa, Lidiéli Dalla, de Moraes, Anaelena Bragança, Menegotto, Isabela Hoffmeister, Costa, Maristela Julio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9851190/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35019086
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20212021057
_version_ 1784872354357182464
author Vaucher, Ana Valéria de Almeida
Costa, Lidiéli Dalla
de Moraes, Anaelena Bragança
Menegotto, Isabela Hoffmeister
Costa, Maristela Julio
author_facet Vaucher, Ana Valéria de Almeida
Costa, Lidiéli Dalla
de Moraes, Anaelena Bragança
Menegotto, Isabela Hoffmeister
Costa, Maristela Julio
author_sort Vaucher, Ana Valéria de Almeida
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Develop new lists of monosyllables for conducting logoaudiometric tests in Portuguese, perform content validation, considering ear side and education and check the equivalence between the lists. METHODS: Were selected 125 monosyllables with different syllabic structures, which were submitted to the content validation process, which included judgment on familiarity, organization of lists, recording of material and auditory recognition. After content validation, the monosyllable lists were subjected to equivalence research, in order to obtain evidence of reliability for the proposed test instrument. RESULTS: Five lists with 25 monosyllables were elaborated and analyzed for content, of these, four lists were validated. There was no statistically significant difference between the responses obtained in the right and left ears. The education of the subjects did not influence the recognition of words. As for the equivalence search, it was found that two lists were equivalent, one not equivalent, but similar and one list was different from the others, and then excluded. CONCLUSION: Two monosyllable lists were validated for content and considered equivalent, with the same level of difficulty between them, and one list was considered similar, which can be used as training to apply the test on the audiological battery. The validated lists were not influenced by ear and education.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9851190
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98511902023-02-01 Lists of monosyllables for logoaudiometric tests: elaboration, content validation and search for equivalence Vaucher, Ana Valéria de Almeida Costa, Lidiéli Dalla de Moraes, Anaelena Bragança Menegotto, Isabela Hoffmeister Costa, Maristela Julio Codas Artigo Original PURPOSE: Develop new lists of monosyllables for conducting logoaudiometric tests in Portuguese, perform content validation, considering ear side and education and check the equivalence between the lists. METHODS: Were selected 125 monosyllables with different syllabic structures, which were submitted to the content validation process, which included judgment on familiarity, organization of lists, recording of material and auditory recognition. After content validation, the monosyllable lists were subjected to equivalence research, in order to obtain evidence of reliability for the proposed test instrument. RESULTS: Five lists with 25 monosyllables were elaborated and analyzed for content, of these, four lists were validated. There was no statistically significant difference between the responses obtained in the right and left ears. The education of the subjects did not influence the recognition of words. As for the equivalence search, it was found that two lists were equivalent, one not equivalent, but similar and one list was different from the others, and then excluded. CONCLUSION: Two monosyllable lists were validated for content and considered equivalent, with the same level of difficulty between them, and one list was considered similar, which can be used as training to apply the test on the audiological battery. The validated lists were not influenced by ear and education. Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia 2022-01-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9851190/ /pubmed/35019086 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20212021057 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Artigo Original
Vaucher, Ana Valéria de Almeida
Costa, Lidiéli Dalla
de Moraes, Anaelena Bragança
Menegotto, Isabela Hoffmeister
Costa, Maristela Julio
Lists of monosyllables for logoaudiometric tests: elaboration, content validation and search for equivalence
title Lists of monosyllables for logoaudiometric tests: elaboration, content validation and search for equivalence
title_full Lists of monosyllables for logoaudiometric tests: elaboration, content validation and search for equivalence
title_fullStr Lists of monosyllables for logoaudiometric tests: elaboration, content validation and search for equivalence
title_full_unstemmed Lists of monosyllables for logoaudiometric tests: elaboration, content validation and search for equivalence
title_short Lists of monosyllables for logoaudiometric tests: elaboration, content validation and search for equivalence
title_sort lists of monosyllables for logoaudiometric tests: elaboration, content validation and search for equivalence
topic Artigo Original
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9851190/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35019086
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/20212021057
work_keys_str_mv AT vaucheranavaleriadealmeida listsofmonosyllablesforlogoaudiometrictestselaborationcontentvalidationandsearchforequivalence
AT costalidielidalla listsofmonosyllablesforlogoaudiometrictestselaborationcontentvalidationandsearchforequivalence
AT demoraesanaelenabraganca listsofmonosyllablesforlogoaudiometrictestselaborationcontentvalidationandsearchforequivalence
AT menegottoisabelahoffmeister listsofmonosyllablesforlogoaudiometrictestselaborationcontentvalidationandsearchforequivalence
AT costamaristelajulio listsofmonosyllablesforlogoaudiometrictestselaborationcontentvalidationandsearchforequivalence