基于智能手机的听力检查的准确性和误区。

Q3 Medicine
Ramtry Waldi Berampu, Indri Adriztina, Ferryan Sofyan, Yetty Machrina, Ichwanul Adenin
{"title":"基于智能手机的听力检查的准确性和误区。","authors":"Ramtry Waldi Berampu, Indri Adriztina, Ferryan Sofyan, Yetty Machrina, Ichwanul Adenin","doi":"10.22038/IJORL.2024.71187.3462","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Approximately 466 million people suffer from hearing loss worldwide, with Indonesia ranking fourth in Southeast Asia. However, conventional pure-tone audiometry is not yet available in many areas because of its high cost. Numerous available smartphone-based audiometry applications are potential alternative screening tools for hearing loss, especially in Indonesia. This study examined the findings on the validation of smartphone-based audiometry applications to assess hearing functions available in Indonesia.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Based on the established eligibility criteria, this study was conducted by browsing the relevant literature validating smartphone-based audiometry applications in Indonesia. Relevant study data, such as the author, year, location, implementation procedures, and outcomes, were extracted and summarized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This systematic review found 17 relevant and eligible publications. Of the six applications tested, 5 were found to have good validity, such as uHear<sup>TM</sup>, Audiogram Mobile<sup>TM</sup>, AudCal<sup>TM</sup>, Hearing Test<sup>TM</sup> e-audiologia, and Wulira<sup>TM</sup>. All smartphone-based audiometry was tested only for the air conduction threshold and was influenced by several factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Because smartphone-based audiometry is inexpensive, simple, and more accessible than conventional audiometric testing, it can be useful as a screening modality or alternative approach to assess hearing function. Unfortunately, smartphone-based audiometry cannot replace conventional audiometry in diagnosing hearing impairment.</p>","PeriodicalId":14607,"journal":{"name":"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","volume":"36 2","pages":"421-431"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10925966/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy and Pitfalls in the Smartphone-Based Audiometry Examination.\",\"authors\":\"Ramtry Waldi Berampu, Indri Adriztina, Ferryan Sofyan, Yetty Machrina, Ichwanul Adenin\",\"doi\":\"10.22038/IJORL.2024.71187.3462\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Approximately 466 million people suffer from hearing loss worldwide, with Indonesia ranking fourth in Southeast Asia. However, conventional pure-tone audiometry is not yet available in many areas because of its high cost. Numerous available smartphone-based audiometry applications are potential alternative screening tools for hearing loss, especially in Indonesia. This study examined the findings on the validation of smartphone-based audiometry applications to assess hearing functions available in Indonesia.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Based on the established eligibility criteria, this study was conducted by browsing the relevant literature validating smartphone-based audiometry applications in Indonesia. Relevant study data, such as the author, year, location, implementation procedures, and outcomes, were extracted and summarized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This systematic review found 17 relevant and eligible publications. Of the six applications tested, 5 were found to have good validity, such as uHear<sup>TM</sup>, Audiogram Mobile<sup>TM</sup>, AudCal<sup>TM</sup>, Hearing Test<sup>TM</sup> e-audiologia, and Wulira<sup>TM</sup>. All smartphone-based audiometry was tested only for the air conduction threshold and was influenced by several factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Because smartphone-based audiometry is inexpensive, simple, and more accessible than conventional audiometric testing, it can be useful as a screening modality or alternative approach to assess hearing function. Unfortunately, smartphone-based audiometry cannot replace conventional audiometry in diagnosing hearing impairment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14607,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology\",\"volume\":\"36 2\",\"pages\":\"421-431\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10925966/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22038/IJORL.2024.71187.3462\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22038/IJORL.2024.71187.3462","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介全球约有 4.66 亿人患有听力损失,印度尼西亚在东南亚排名第四。然而,由于传统的纯音测听成本高昂,在许多地区尚未普及。许多基于智能手机的测听应用程序是听力损失筛查的潜在替代工具,尤其是在印度尼西亚。本研究对印尼现有的智能手机测听应用程序进行了验证,以评估听力功能:根据既定的资格标准,本研究通过浏览印尼验证智能手机测听应用程序的相关文献进行。提取并总结了相关研究数据,如作者、年份、地点、实施程序和结果:结果:本次系统综述共发现 17 篇符合条件的相关文献。在测试的六款应用程序中,有五款具有良好的有效性,如 uHearTM、Audiogram MobileTM、AudCalTM、Hearing TestTM e-audiologia 和 WuliraTM。所有基于智能手机的听力测试都只测试了气导阈值,并受到多种因素的影响:结论:与传统听力测试相比,智能手机测听成本低廉、操作简单且更容易获得,因此可作为评估听力功能的筛查方式或替代方法。遗憾的是,智能手机测听不能取代传统测听诊断听力损伤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accuracy and Pitfalls in the Smartphone-Based Audiometry Examination.

Introduction: Approximately 466 million people suffer from hearing loss worldwide, with Indonesia ranking fourth in Southeast Asia. However, conventional pure-tone audiometry is not yet available in many areas because of its high cost. Numerous available smartphone-based audiometry applications are potential alternative screening tools for hearing loss, especially in Indonesia. This study examined the findings on the validation of smartphone-based audiometry applications to assess hearing functions available in Indonesia.

Materials and methods: Based on the established eligibility criteria, this study was conducted by browsing the relevant literature validating smartphone-based audiometry applications in Indonesia. Relevant study data, such as the author, year, location, implementation procedures, and outcomes, were extracted and summarized.

Results: This systematic review found 17 relevant and eligible publications. Of the six applications tested, 5 were found to have good validity, such as uHearTM, Audiogram MobileTM, AudCalTM, Hearing TestTM e-audiologia, and WuliraTM. All smartphone-based audiometry was tested only for the air conduction threshold and was influenced by several factors.

Conclusion: Because smartphone-based audiometry is inexpensive, simple, and more accessible than conventional audiometric testing, it can be useful as a screening modality or alternative approach to assess hearing function. Unfortunately, smartphone-based audiometry cannot replace conventional audiometry in diagnosing hearing impairment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Medicine-Otorhinolaryngology
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
12 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:481959085
Book学术官方微信