ArticleJournal of communication disorders
Speech audiometry findings from HIV+ and HIV- adults in the MACS and WIHS longitudinal cohort studies.
Article in Journal of communication disorders. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Words-in-Noise Test Performance in Young Adults Perinatally HIV Infected and Exposed, Uninfected.American journal of audiology · 2020Article
- Main Aspects of Peripheral and Central Hearing System Involvement in Unexplained HIV-Related Hearing Complaints.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare various speech audiometry measures between HIV+ and HIV- adults and to further evaluate the association between speech audiometry and HIV disease variables in HIV+ adults only. Three hundred ninety-six adults from the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS) and Women's Interagency HIV Study (WIHS) completed speech audiometry testing. There were 262 men, of whom 117 (44.7%) were HIV+, and 134 women, of whom 105 (78.4%) were HIV+. Speech audiometry was conducted as part of the standard clinical audiological evaluation that included otoscopy, tympanometry, and pure-tone air- and bone-conduction thresholds. Specific speech audiometry measures included speech recognition thresholds (SRT) and word recognition scores in quiet presented at 40dB sensation level (SL) in reference to the SRT. SRT data were categorized in 5-dB steps from 0 to 25dB hearing level (HL) with one category as ≥30dB HL while word recognition scores were categorized as <90%, 90-99%, and 100%. A generalized estimating equations model was used to evaluate the association between HIV status and both ordinal outcomes. The SRT distributions across HIV+ and HIV- adults were similar. HIV+ and HIV- adults had a similar percentages of word recognition scores <90%, a lower percentage of HIV- adults had 90-99%, but HIV- adults had a higher percentage of 100%. After adjusting for covariables, HIV+ adults were borderline significantly more likely to have a higher SRT than HIV- adults (odds ratio [OR]=1.45, p=0.06). Among HIV+ adults, HIV-related variables (i.e., CD4+ T-cell counts, HIV viral load, and ever history of clinical AIDS) were not significantly associated with either SRT or word recognition score data. There was, however, a ceiling effect for word recognition scores, probably the result of obtaining this measure in quiet with a relatively high presentation level. A more complex listening task, such as speech-in-noise testing, may be a more clinically informative test to evaluate the effects of HIV on speech communication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.