ArticleCoDAS2022
AudBility: test-retest reliability in typically developing children aged 6 to 7 years.
Article in CoDAS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeto investigate the test-retest reliability of the AudBility program in typically developing children aged six-seven years.
methods29 children, male and female, right-handed, native Portuguese speakers and adequate school performance for the age group studied, underwent previous meatoscopy, immittance measurements and the AudBility program was applied, composed of a self-perception questionnaire and auditory tasks, being analyzed the abilities of sound localization, auditory closure, figure-ground, dichotic digits test, temporal resolution, and temporal ordering of frequency and duration. The program was designed and reapplied with an interval of one week under the same conditions. The performance in each task was presented from central tendency and dispersion data and was conducted using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), based on the 95% confidence interval (CI).
resultsThe analyses showed a positive and significant ICC (p<0.01) for the questionnaire and auditory tasks, except for auditory closure, in the right and left ears and figure-ground in the left ear. The questionnaire mean ICC was 0.742 and ranged from -0.012 to 0.698 for the auditory tasks.
conclusionBased on mean results and upper limit of the CI, the findings showed agreement between moments, classified as good for the questionnaire and moderate to good for five of the seven auditory analyzed tasks (ICC>0.05 and <0.9). The results of the reliability study represent an important parameter for validating the program for the studied age group.
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.