Tess K Koerner, Melissa A Papesh, Frederick J Gallun
{"title":"Characterizing Auditory Deficits in Veterans With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Principal Component Analysis Approach.","authors":"Tess K Koerner, Melissa A Papesh, Frederick J Gallun","doi":"10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>There is currently no consensus regarding an evidence-based assessment protocol for normal-hearing patients with a history of brain injury who report auditory difficulties. This work used a large test battery to identify measures that explained the most variability across participants with and without a history of head injury, to determine relationships between measures, and to explore patterns of performance across participants, with the aim of identifying measures that should be considered in future research on developing clinical assessment protocols for this unique patient population.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A principal component analysis was conducted on data from 22 self-report, central auditory processing, and cognitive processing measures completed by a sample of 95 participants. Participants included Veterans with a history of blast exposure, Veterans with a history of nonblast mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), and a sample of control participants with no history of head injury.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Several central auditory processing and self-report measures explained variance in the data set. However, analyses revealed that performance on the behavioral auditory processing tests was not predictive of self-reported auditory and non-auditory symptom severity. A cluster analysis further revealed spread in performance across participants with a history of blast exposure or nonblast mTBI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results from the current study underscore the need for a comprehensive, individualized approach to patient care for those with a history of head injury. The measures identified in the current analysis should be investigated in future studies that aim to develop an auditory assessment protocol for this patient population.</p><p><strong>Supplemental material: </strong>https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.32060232.</p>","PeriodicalId":49241,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Audiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Audiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1044/2026_AJA-25-00253","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: There is currently no consensus regarding an evidence-based assessment protocol for normal-hearing patients with a history of brain injury who report auditory difficulties. This work used a large test battery to identify measures that explained the most variability across participants with and without a history of head injury, to determine relationships between measures, and to explore patterns of performance across participants, with the aim of identifying measures that should be considered in future research on developing clinical assessment protocols for this unique patient population.
Method: A principal component analysis was conducted on data from 22 self-report, central auditory processing, and cognitive processing measures completed by a sample of 95 participants. Participants included Veterans with a history of blast exposure, Veterans with a history of nonblast mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), and a sample of control participants with no history of head injury.
Results: Several central auditory processing and self-report measures explained variance in the data set. However, analyses revealed that performance on the behavioral auditory processing tests was not predictive of self-reported auditory and non-auditory symptom severity. A cluster analysis further revealed spread in performance across participants with a history of blast exposure or nonblast mTBI.
Conclusions: Results from the current study underscore the need for a comprehensive, individualized approach to patient care for those with a history of head injury. The measures identified in the current analysis should be investigated in future studies that aim to develop an auditory assessment protocol for this patient population.
期刊介绍：
Mission: AJA publishes peer-reviewed research and other scholarly articles pertaining to clinical audiology methods and issues, and serves as an outlet for discussion of related professional and educational issues and ideas. The journal is an international outlet for research on clinical research pertaining to screening, diagnosis, management and outcomes of hearing and balance disorders as well as the etiologies and characteristics of these disorders. The clinical orientation of the journal allows for the publication of reports on audiology as implemented nationally and internationally, including novel clinical procedures, approaches, and cases. AJA seeks to advance evidence-based practice by disseminating the results of new studies as well as providing a forum for critical reviews and meta-analyses of previously published work.
Scope: The broad field of clinical audiology, including audiologic/aural rehabilitation; balance and balance disorders; cultural and linguistic diversity; detection, diagnosis, prevention, habilitation, rehabilitation, and monitoring of hearing loss; hearing aids, cochlear implants, and hearing-assistive technology; hearing disorders; lifespan perspectives on auditory function; speech perception; and tinnitus.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
