Validation of the Central Auditory Processing Self-Perception Questionnaire (QAPAC) applied to students, parents, and teachers.

IF 0.9 Q4 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
CoDAS Pub Date : 2026-05-18 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.1590/2317-1782/e20250121pt
Beatriz Lopes Tambascia, Nádia Giulian de Carvalho, Maria Francisca Colella-Santos, Maria Isabel Ramos do Amaral
{"title":"Validation of the Central Auditory Processing Self-Perception Questionnaire (QAPAC) applied to students, parents, and teachers.","authors":"Beatriz Lopes Tambascia, Nádia Giulian de Carvalho, Maria Francisca Colella-Santos, Maria Isabel Ramos do Amaral","doi":"10.1590/2317-1782/e20250121pt","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To analyze the performance of children with and without academic difficulties, as well as that of their parents and teachers, on the Central Auditory Processing Self-Perception Questionnaire (QAPAC), and to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the questionnaire for the diagnosis of Central Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 257 children from a public school, aged between six and ten years, without diagnoses of cognitive impairments or neurodevelopmental disorders, participated in the study. Stage 1, conducted at the school, included peripheral hearing screening and the administration of the QAPAC. Stage 2, conducted at the Institution's laboratory, involved basic audiological evaluation and behavioral assessment of central auditory processing (CAP), as well as administration of the QAPAC to parents and distribution of the teacher version to educators. At the end of data collection, the sample was divided into group 1 (G1) - 171 children without complaints and/or academic difficulties, and group 2 (G2) - 86 children with academic difficulties. The mean scores were compared within and between groups. Based on G1 performance, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine cutoff points for normal performance, risk, and high risk of CAPD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>G1 showed significantly better performance than G2 on all three versions of the QAPAC (p<0.005). In G2, teachers reported worse scores compared to the children (p<0.001). The cutoff points established for CAPD risk were 44.5 for children's responses and 42.5 for teachers, considering the best balance between sensitivity and specificity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Children with academic difficulties showed poorer performance on the QAPAC, regardless of the respondent. The sensitivity and specificity values support the use of QAPAC as a valid screening tool for central auditory processing.</p>","PeriodicalId":46547,"journal":{"name":"CoDAS","volume":"38 3","pages":"e20250121"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13193188/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CoDAS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-1782/e20250121pt","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze the performance of children with and without academic difficulties, as well as that of their parents and teachers, on the Central Auditory Processing Self-Perception Questionnaire (QAPAC), and to assess the sensitivity and specificity of the questionnaire for the diagnosis of Central Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD).

Methods: A total of 257 children from a public school, aged between six and ten years, without diagnoses of cognitive impairments or neurodevelopmental disorders, participated in the study. Stage 1, conducted at the school, included peripheral hearing screening and the administration of the QAPAC. Stage 2, conducted at the Institution's laboratory, involved basic audiological evaluation and behavioral assessment of central auditory processing (CAP), as well as administration of the QAPAC to parents and distribution of the teacher version to educators. At the end of data collection, the sample was divided into group 1 (G1) - 171 children without complaints and/or academic difficulties, and group 2 (G2) - 86 children with academic difficulties. The mean scores were compared within and between groups. Based on G1 performance, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine cutoff points for normal performance, risk, and high risk of CAPD.

Results: G1 showed significantly better performance than G2 on all three versions of the QAPAC (p<0.005). In G2, teachers reported worse scores compared to the children (p<0.001). The cutoff points established for CAPD risk were 44.5 for children's responses and 42.5 for teachers, considering the best balance between sensitivity and specificity.

Conclusion: Children with academic difficulties showed poorer performance on the QAPAC, regardless of the respondent. The sensitivity and specificity values support the use of QAPAC as a valid screening tool for central auditory processing.

中央听觉加工自我知觉问卷(QAPAC)在学生、家长和教师中的应用验证。
目的:分析学业困难儿童、非学业困难儿童及其家长、教师对中枢性听觉加工自我知觉问卷(Central Auditory Processing Self-Perception Questionnaire, QAPAC)的填写情况,评价该问卷对中枢性听觉加工障碍(Central Auditory Processing Disorder, CAPD)诊断的敏感性和特异性。方法:共有257名来自公立学校的儿童参加了这项研究,年龄在6到10岁之间,没有被诊断出认知障碍或神经发育障碍。第一阶段在学校进行,包括外周听力筛查和QAPAC的实施。第二阶段在该机构的实验室进行,包括对中枢听觉处理(CAP)的基本听力学评估和行为评估,以及对家长的QAPAC管理和对教育工作者的教师版本分发。在数据收集结束时,将样本分为1组(G1) - 171名无投诉和/或学习困难的儿童,和2组(G2) - 86名有学习困难的儿童。在组内和组间比较平均得分。根据G1表现,进行受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析,确定CAPD正常表现、风险和高风险的截止点。结果:G1在所有三个版本的QAPAC上的表现都明显优于G2(结论:学业困难儿童在QAPAC上的表现较差,与被调查者无关。灵敏度和特异性值支持使用QAPAC作为中央听觉处理的有效筛选工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CoDAS
CoDAS AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
103
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书