ArticleAmerican journal of audiology2026
Short Forms and Computerized Adaptive Tests With Monosyllabic Words Can Efficiently Measure Speech Recognition.
Article in American journal of audiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeConstruct validity of the Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 (NU-6) monosyllabic word lists or shortened versions have not been examined using the Rasch measurement theory. The study purposes were to test the fit of the Rasch measurement model to monosyllabic word lists and whether short forms and computerized adaptive testing can measure speech recognition.
methodA cross-sectional study design with 50 persons (average age = 71 years; 35 female, 15 male) with mild-to-moderate hearing loss was used to test the fit of NU-6 Word Lists 1 and 2 to the Rasch measurement model. Pearson's correlations quantified the accuracy of person measures from short forms or computer-adaptive testing simulations with measures from the full lists. Average standard error of person measures quantified measurement precision.
resultsWord lists were unidimensional, had negligible misfit, and had high person reliability. Nineteen- and 11-word short forms were made per list. Person measures from 19-word short forms had a high linear association with person measures from the full word lists (List 1:
conclusionShort forms with 19 words and computerized adaptive testing may accurately and precisely measure speech recognition.
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.