The Experts below are selected from a list of 5415 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

David R. Moore - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Auditory Processing performance and nonsensory factors in children with specific language impairment or Auditory Processing Disorder
    Seminars in Hearing, 2014
    Co-Authors: Melanie A Ferguson, David R. Moore
    Abstract:

    The nature of Auditory Processing deficits is at the heart of understanding Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) in children. This article reviews evidence that confounding nonsensory factors, including maturation, Processing efficiency, and cognition, influence Auditory Processing in children with APD or language learning impairment. Experimental evidence is presented to show that performance thresholds on nonspeech Auditory Processing (AP) tests, such as tone detection tasks in noise or in quiet, are poorer in children clinically diagnosed with APD or specific language impairment (SLI), compared to typically developing mainstream school (MS) children. However, with the exception of backward masking, these group differences disappeared for all AP tests after accounting for nonverbal IQ. Intrinsic attention, indexed by variability in AP test performance, was examined alongside AP threshold performance. Generally there was no difference in intrinsic attention across the three participant groups (MS, SLI, APD), but frequency discrimination (FD) was an exception. Thus, although reduced intrinsic attention has been shown to be a factor in the presenting symptoms of APD, including poor listening, speech intelligibility, and communication, there is, surprisingly, no robust evidence that intrinsic attention in children identified with APD or SLI is any poorer than that in typically developing children.

  • Assessment of Children With Suspected Auditory Processing Disorder: A Factor Analysis Study
    Ear and hearing, 2014
    Co-Authors: Ansar U Ahmmed, Melanie A Ferguson, Julie R Bath, Christopher J. Plack, David R. Moore
    Abstract:

    To identify the factors that may underlie the deficits in children with listening difficulties, despite normal pure-tone audiograms. These children may have Auditory Processing Disorder (APD), but there is no universally agreed consensus as to what constitutes APD. The authors therefore refer to these children as children with suspected APD (susAPD) and aim to clarify the role of attention, cognition, memory, sensorimotor Processing speed, speech, and nonspeech Auditory Processing in susAPD. It was expected that a factor analysis would show how nonAuditory and supramodal factors relate to Auditory behavioral measures in such children with susAPD. This would facilitate greater understanding of the nature of listening difficulties, thus further helping with characterizing APD and designing multimodal test batteries to diagnose APD.

  • The diagnosis and management of Auditory Processing Disorder.
    Language speech and hearing services in schools, 2011
    Co-Authors: David R. Moore
    Abstract:

    Purpose To provide a personal perspective on Auditory Processing Disorder (APD), with reference to the recent clinical forum on APD and the needs of clinical speech-language pathologists and audiol...

  • Communication, Listening, Cognitive and Speech Perception Skills in Children With Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) or Specific Language Impairment (SLI)
    Journal of speech language and hearing research : JSLHR, 2010
    Co-Authors: Melanie A Ferguson, Alison Riley, R. Hall, David R. Moore
    Abstract:

    Purpose Parental reports of communication, listening, and behavior in children receiving a clinical diagnosis of specific language impairment (SLI) or Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) were compar...

  • nature of Auditory Processing Disorder in children
    Pediatrics, 2010
    Co-Authors: David R. Moore, Melanie A Ferguson, Mark Edmondsonjones, Sonia Ratib, Alison Riley
    Abstract:

    OBJECTIVE: We tested the specific hypothesis that the presentation of Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) is related to a sensory Processing deficit. METHODS: Randomly chosen, 6- to 11-year-old children with normal hearing (N = 1469) were tested in schools in 4 regional centers across the United Kingdom. Caregivers completed questionnaires regarding their participating children9s listening and communication skills. Children completed a battery of audiometric, Auditory Processing (AP), speech-in-noise, cognitive (IQ, memory, language, and literacy), and attention (Auditory and visual) tests. AP measures separated the sensory and nonsensory contributions to spectral and temporal perception. RESULTS: AP improved with age. Poor-for-age AP was significantly related to poor cognitive, communication, and speech-in-noise performance (P CONCLUSIONS: Presenting symptoms of APD were largely unrelated to Auditory sensory Processing. Response variability and cognitive performance were the best predictors of poor communication and listening. We suggest that APD is primarily an attention problem and that clinical diagnosis and management, as well as further research, should be based on that premise.

Doris-eva Bamiou - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • absence of rhythm benefit on speech in noise recognition in children diagnosed with Auditory Processing Disorder
    Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2020
    Co-Authors: Christos Sidiras, Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Doris-eva Bamiou, Ioannis Nimatoudis
    Abstract:

    Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) is a specific deficit in the Processing of Auditory information along the central Auditory nervous system. It is characterized mainly by deficits in speech in noise recognition. APD children may also present with deficits in Processing of Auditory rhythm. Rhythmic neural entrainment is commonly present in perception of both speech and music, while Auditory rhythmic priming of speech in noise has been known to enhance recognition in typical children. Here, we test the hypothesis that the effect of rhythmic priming is compromised in APD children, and further assessed for correlations with verbal and non-verbal Auditory Processing and cognition. Forty APD children and 33 neurotypical ones were assessed through (a) WRRC, a test measuring the effects of rhythmic priming on speech in noise recognition, (b) a battery of Auditory Processing tests, commonly used in APD diagnosis, and (c) two cognitive tests, assessing working memory and Auditory attention respectively. Findings revealed that (a) the effect of rhythmic priming on speech in noise recognition is absent in APD children, (b) it is linked to non-verbal Auditory Processing, and (c) it is only weakly dependent on cognition. We discuss these findings in light of Dynamic Attention Theory, neural entrainment and neural oscillations and suggest that these functions may be compromised in APD children. Further research is needed (a) to explore the nature of the mechanics of rhythmic priming on speech in noise perception and why the effect is absent in APD children, (b) which other mechanisms related to both rhythm and language are also affected in this population, and (c) whether music/rhythm training can restore deficits in rhythm effects.

  • Clinical Expertise Is Core to an Evidence-Based Approach to Auditory Processing Disorder: A Reply to Neijenhuis et al. 2019.
    Frontiers in neurology, 2019
    Co-Authors: Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Gail D Chermak, Doris-eva Bamiou, Tone Stokkereit Mattsson, Christiane Kiese-himmel, Helen Grech, Martin Ptok, Hung Thai-van, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    The opinion article "An Evidence-based Perspective on Misconceptions Regarding Pediatric Auditory Processing Disorder" by Neijenhuis et al. (1) presents a distorted view of the evidence-based approach used in medicine. The authors focus on the amorphous non-diagnostic entity "listening difficulties" not Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) and create confusion that could jeopardize clinical services to individuals with APD. In our perspective article, we rebut Neijenhuis et al. (1), and more importantly, we present a rationale for evidence-based practice founded on the premise that research on APD is only clinically applicable when conducted on clinical populations diagnosed with APD.

  • deficits in Auditory rhythm perception in children with Auditory Processing Disorder are unrelated to attention
    Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2019
    Co-Authors: Christos Sidiras, Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Doris-eva Bamiou, Ioannis Nimatoudis, Manon Grube, Timothy D Griffiths
    Abstract:

    Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) is defined as a specific deficit in the Processing of audi-tory information along the central Auditory nervous system, including bottom-up and top-down neural connectivity. Even though music comprises a big part of audition, testing music perception in APD population has not yet gained wide attention in research. This work tests the hypothesis that deficits in rhythm perception occur in a group of subjects with APD. The primary focus of this study is to measure perception of a simple Auditory rhythm, i.e. short isochronous sequences of beats, in APD children and to compare their performance to age-matched normal controls. The secondary question is to study the relationship between cognition and Auditory Processing of rhythm perception. We tested 39 APD children and 25 control children aged between 6 and 12 years via a) clinical APD tests, including a monaural speech in noise test, b) Isochrony task, a test measuring the detection of small deviations from perfect isochrony in a isochronous beats sequence, and c) two cognitive tests (audi-tory memory and Auditory attention). APD children scored worse in Isochrony task compared to the age-matched control group. In the APD group, neither measure of cognition (attention nor memory) correlated with performance in Isochrony task. Left (but not right) speech in noise performance cor-related with performance in Isochrony task. In the control group a large correlation (r=-.701, p=.001) was observed between Isochrony task and attention, but not with memory. The results demonstrate a deficit in the perception of regularly timed sequences in APD that is relevant to the perception of speech in noise, a ubiquitous complaint in this condition. Our results suggest a) the existence of a non-attention related rhythm perception deficit in APD children and b) differential effects of attention on task performance in normal vs. APD children. The potential beneficial use of music/rhythm trai-ning for rehabilitation purposes in APD children would need to be explored.

  • letter to the editor response to vermiglio 2018 the gold standard and Auditory Processing Disorder
    Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 2018
    Co-Authors: Gail D Chermak, Doris-eva Bamiou, Vivian Iliadou, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    Purpose and Conclusion This letter to the editor is a rebuttal to Vermiglio's “The Gold Standard and Auditory Processing Disorder” (2018). We identify several faulty premises, inconsistent use of t...

  • Otoacoustic emission suppression in children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder and speech in noise perception deficits.
    International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology, 2018
    Co-Authors: Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Gail D Chermak, Jeffrey Weihing, Doris-eva Bamiou
    Abstract:

    Abstract Objective The present study was designed to test the hypothesis that medial olivocochlear system functionality is associated with speech recognition in babble performance in children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder. Method Children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder who specifically demonstrated speech in noise deficits were compared to children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder without these deficits. Suppression effects were examined across 15 time intervals to examine variability. Analysis of right and left ear suppression was performed separately to evaluate laterality. Study sample 52 children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder, aged 6–14 years were divided into normal or abnormal groups based on SinB performance in each ear. Cut-off value was set at SNR = 1.33 dB. Transient otoacoustic emissions suppression was measured. Results The abnormal Speech in Babble Right Ear group showed significant negative correlations with suppression levels for 7 of the 15 time intervals measured. No significant correlations with SinBR performance were observed for the remaining time intervals, as was the case for the typically evaluated R8-18 time interval and the Speech in Babble Left Ear. Conclusions Results indicate that suppression is influenced by the time window analysed, and ear tested, and is associated with speech recognition in babble performance in children with central Auditory Processing Disorder.

Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • absence of rhythm benefit on speech in noise recognition in children diagnosed with Auditory Processing Disorder
    Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2020
    Co-Authors: Christos Sidiras, Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Doris-eva Bamiou, Ioannis Nimatoudis
    Abstract:

    Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) is a specific deficit in the Processing of Auditory information along the central Auditory nervous system. It is characterized mainly by deficits in speech in noise recognition. APD children may also present with deficits in Processing of Auditory rhythm. Rhythmic neural entrainment is commonly present in perception of both speech and music, while Auditory rhythmic priming of speech in noise has been known to enhance recognition in typical children. Here, we test the hypothesis that the effect of rhythmic priming is compromised in APD children, and further assessed for correlations with verbal and non-verbal Auditory Processing and cognition. Forty APD children and 33 neurotypical ones were assessed through (a) WRRC, a test measuring the effects of rhythmic priming on speech in noise recognition, (b) a battery of Auditory Processing tests, commonly used in APD diagnosis, and (c) two cognitive tests, assessing working memory and Auditory attention respectively. Findings revealed that (a) the effect of rhythmic priming on speech in noise recognition is absent in APD children, (b) it is linked to non-verbal Auditory Processing, and (c) it is only weakly dependent on cognition. We discuss these findings in light of Dynamic Attention Theory, neural entrainment and neural oscillations and suggest that these functions may be compromised in APD children. Further research is needed (a) to explore the nature of the mechanics of rhythmic priming on speech in noise perception and why the effect is absent in APD children, (b) which other mechanisms related to both rhythm and language are also affected in this population, and (c) whether music/rhythm training can restore deficits in rhythm effects.

  • Clinical Expertise Is Core to an Evidence-Based Approach to Auditory Processing Disorder: A Reply to Neijenhuis et al. 2019.
    Frontiers in neurology, 2019
    Co-Authors: Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Gail D Chermak, Doris-eva Bamiou, Tone Stokkereit Mattsson, Christiane Kiese-himmel, Helen Grech, Martin Ptok, Hung Thai-van, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    The opinion article "An Evidence-based Perspective on Misconceptions Regarding Pediatric Auditory Processing Disorder" by Neijenhuis et al. (1) presents a distorted view of the evidence-based approach used in medicine. The authors focus on the amorphous non-diagnostic entity "listening difficulties" not Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) and create confusion that could jeopardize clinical services to individuals with APD. In our perspective article, we rebut Neijenhuis et al. (1), and more importantly, we present a rationale for evidence-based practice founded on the premise that research on APD is only clinically applicable when conducted on clinical populations diagnosed with APD.

  • deficits in Auditory rhythm perception in children with Auditory Processing Disorder are unrelated to attention
    Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2019
    Co-Authors: Christos Sidiras, Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Doris-eva Bamiou, Ioannis Nimatoudis, Manon Grube, Timothy D Griffiths
    Abstract:

    Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) is defined as a specific deficit in the Processing of audi-tory information along the central Auditory nervous system, including bottom-up and top-down neural connectivity. Even though music comprises a big part of audition, testing music perception in APD population has not yet gained wide attention in research. This work tests the hypothesis that deficits in rhythm perception occur in a group of subjects with APD. The primary focus of this study is to measure perception of a simple Auditory rhythm, i.e. short isochronous sequences of beats, in APD children and to compare their performance to age-matched normal controls. The secondary question is to study the relationship between cognition and Auditory Processing of rhythm perception. We tested 39 APD children and 25 control children aged between 6 and 12 years via a) clinical APD tests, including a monaural speech in noise test, b) Isochrony task, a test measuring the detection of small deviations from perfect isochrony in a isochronous beats sequence, and c) two cognitive tests (audi-tory memory and Auditory attention). APD children scored worse in Isochrony task compared to the age-matched control group. In the APD group, neither measure of cognition (attention nor memory) correlated with performance in Isochrony task. Left (but not right) speech in noise performance cor-related with performance in Isochrony task. In the control group a large correlation (r=-.701, p=.001) was observed between Isochrony task and attention, but not with memory. The results demonstrate a deficit in the perception of regularly timed sequences in APD that is relevant to the perception of speech in noise, a ubiquitous complaint in this condition. Our results suggest a) the existence of a non-attention related rhythm perception deficit in APD children and b) differential effects of attention on task performance in normal vs. APD children. The potential beneficial use of music/rhythm trai-ning for rehabilitation purposes in APD children would need to be explored.

  • Otoacoustic emission suppression in children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder and speech in noise perception deficits.
    International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology, 2018
    Co-Authors: Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Gail D Chermak, Jeffrey Weihing, Doris-eva Bamiou
    Abstract:

    Abstract Objective The present study was designed to test the hypothesis that medial olivocochlear system functionality is associated with speech recognition in babble performance in children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder. Method Children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder who specifically demonstrated speech in noise deficits were compared to children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder without these deficits. Suppression effects were examined across 15 time intervals to examine variability. Analysis of right and left ear suppression was performed separately to evaluate laterality. Study sample 52 children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder, aged 6–14 years were divided into normal or abnormal groups based on SinB performance in each ear. Cut-off value was set at SNR = 1.33 dB. Transient otoacoustic emissions suppression was measured. Results The abnormal Speech in Babble Right Ear group showed significant negative correlations with suppression levels for 7 of the 15 time intervals measured. No significant correlations with SinBR performance were observed for the remaining time intervals, as was the case for the typically evaluated R8-18 time interval and the Speech in Babble Left Ear. Conclusions Results indicate that suppression is influenced by the time window analysed, and ear tested, and is associated with speech recognition in babble performance in children with central Auditory Processing Disorder.

  • Common Misconceptions Regarding Pediatric Auditory Processing Disorder
    Frontiers in neurology, 2018
    Co-Authors: Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Christiane Kiese-himmel
    Abstract:

    Pediatric hearing evaluation based on pure tone audiometry does not always reflect how a child hears in everyday life. This practice is inappropriate when evaluating the difficulties children experiencing Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) in school or on the playground. Despite the marked increase in research on pediatric APD, there remains limited access to proper evaluation worldwide. This perspective article presents five common misconceptions of APD that contribute to inappropriate or limited management in children experiencing these deficits. The misconceptions discussed are (1) the Disorder cannot be diagnosed due to the lack of a gold standard diagnostic test; (2) making generalizations based on profiles of children suspected of APD and not diagnosed with the Disorder; (3) it is best to discard an APD diagnosis when another Disorder is present; (4) arguing that the known link between Auditory perception and higher cognition function precludes the validity of APD as a clinical entity; and (5) APD is not a clinical entity. These five misconceptions are described and rebutted using published data as well as critical thinking on current available knowledge on APD.

Gail D Chermak - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Clinical Expertise Is Core to an Evidence-Based Approach to Auditory Processing Disorder: A Reply to Neijenhuis et al. 2019.
    Frontiers in neurology, 2019
    Co-Authors: Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Gail D Chermak, Doris-eva Bamiou, Tone Stokkereit Mattsson, Christiane Kiese-himmel, Helen Grech, Martin Ptok, Hung Thai-van, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    The opinion article "An Evidence-based Perspective on Misconceptions Regarding Pediatric Auditory Processing Disorder" by Neijenhuis et al. (1) presents a distorted view of the evidence-based approach used in medicine. The authors focus on the amorphous non-diagnostic entity "listening difficulties" not Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) and create confusion that could jeopardize clinical services to individuals with APD. In our perspective article, we rebut Neijenhuis et al. (1), and more importantly, we present a rationale for evidence-based practice founded on the premise that research on APD is only clinically applicable when conducted on clinical populations diagnosed with APD.

  • letter to the editor response to vermiglio 2018 the gold standard and Auditory Processing Disorder
    Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 2018
    Co-Authors: Gail D Chermak, Doris-eva Bamiou, Vivian Iliadou, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    Purpose and Conclusion This letter to the editor is a rebuttal to Vermiglio's “The Gold Standard and Auditory Processing Disorder” (2018). We identify several faulty premises, inconsistent use of t...

  • Otoacoustic emission suppression in children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder and speech in noise perception deficits.
    International journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology, 2018
    Co-Authors: Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Gail D Chermak, Jeffrey Weihing, Doris-eva Bamiou
    Abstract:

    Abstract Objective The present study was designed to test the hypothesis that medial olivocochlear system functionality is associated with speech recognition in babble performance in children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder. Method Children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder who specifically demonstrated speech in noise deficits were compared to children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder without these deficits. Suppression effects were examined across 15 time intervals to examine variability. Analysis of right and left ear suppression was performed separately to evaluate laterality. Study sample 52 children diagnosed with central Auditory Processing Disorder, aged 6–14 years were divided into normal or abnormal groups based on SinB performance in each ear. Cut-off value was set at SNR = 1.33 dB. Transient otoacoustic emissions suppression was measured. Results The abnormal Speech in Babble Right Ear group showed significant negative correlations with suppression levels for 7 of the 15 time intervals measured. No significant correlations with SinBR performance were observed for the remaining time intervals, as was the case for the typically evaluated R8-18 time interval and the Speech in Babble Left Ear. Conclusions Results indicate that suppression is influenced by the time window analysed, and ear tested, and is associated with speech recognition in babble performance in children with central Auditory Processing Disorder.

  • Auditory Training for Central Auditory Processing Disorder.
    Seminars in hearing, 2015
    Co-Authors: Jeffrey Weihing, Gail D Chermak, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    Auditory training (AT) is an important component of rehabilitation for patients with central Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD). The present article identifies and describes aspects of AT as they relate to applications in this population. A description of the types of Auditory processes along with information on relevant AT protocols that can be used to address these specific deficits is included. Characteristics and principles of effective AT procedures also are detailed in light of research that reflects on their value. Finally, research investigating AT in populations who show CAPD or present with Auditory complaints is reported. Although efficacy data in this area are still emerging, current findings support the use of AT for treatment of Auditory difficulties.

  • comparison of two tests of Auditory temporal resolution in children with central Auditory Processing Disorder adults with psychosis and adult professional musicians
    International Journal of Audiology, 2014
    Co-Authors: Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Gail D Chermak, Doris-eva Bamiou, Ioannis Nimatoudis
    Abstract:

    AbstractObjective: Evaluate Auditory temporal resolution threshold outcomes across three different populations. Design: Two commercially available tests of Auditory gap detection (Random gap detection (RGDT) test, and Gaps-in-noise (GIN) test) were administered to all participants. Study sample: Adult professional musicians (APM) (N = 11, age range 28–61 years); children with central Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD) (N = 22, age range 7.5–17 years); and first episode psychosis patients (FEP) (N = 17, age range 18–48 years). Results: It was not possible to calculate a threshold for the RGDT for 13 of 22 children with CAPD and for 7 of 17 adults with FEP due to response inconsistency. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) excluding cases that produced inconsistent RGDT results showed that only RGDT thresholds differed across groups (F = 8.73, p = 0.001). Three t-tests comparing test means within group revealed statistically significant differences between the gap detection thresholds obtained with the RGDT vs. th...

Frank E Musiek - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Clinical Expertise Is Core to an Evidence-Based Approach to Auditory Processing Disorder: A Reply to Neijenhuis et al. 2019.
    Frontiers in neurology, 2019
    Co-Authors: Vasiliki Vivian Iliadou, Gail D Chermak, Doris-eva Bamiou, Tone Stokkereit Mattsson, Christiane Kiese-himmel, Helen Grech, Martin Ptok, Hung Thai-van, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    The opinion article "An Evidence-based Perspective on Misconceptions Regarding Pediatric Auditory Processing Disorder" by Neijenhuis et al. (1) presents a distorted view of the evidence-based approach used in medicine. The authors focus on the amorphous non-diagnostic entity "listening difficulties" not Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) and create confusion that could jeopardize clinical services to individuals with APD. In our perspective article, we rebut Neijenhuis et al. (1), and more importantly, we present a rationale for evidence-based practice founded on the premise that research on APD is only clinically applicable when conducted on clinical populations diagnosed with APD.

  • letter to the editor response to vermiglio 2018 the gold standard and Auditory Processing Disorder
    Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 2018
    Co-Authors: Gail D Chermak, Doris-eva Bamiou, Vivian Iliadou, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    Purpose and Conclusion This letter to the editor is a rebuttal to Vermiglio's “The Gold Standard and Auditory Processing Disorder” (2018). We identify several faulty premises, inconsistent use of t...

  • Auditory Training for Central Auditory Processing Disorder.
    Seminars in hearing, 2015
    Co-Authors: Jeffrey Weihing, Gail D Chermak, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    Auditory training (AT) is an important component of rehabilitation for patients with central Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD). The present article identifies and describes aspects of AT as they relate to applications in this population. A description of the types of Auditory processes along with information on relevant AT protocols that can be used to address these specific deficits is included. Characteristics and principles of effective AT procedures also are detailed in light of research that reflects on their value. Finally, research investigating AT in populations who show CAPD or present with Auditory complaints is reported. Although efficacy data in this area are still emerging, current findings support the use of AT for treatment of Auditory difficulties.

  • efficacy of Auditory interventions for central Auditory Processing Disorder a response to fey et al 2011
    Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 2012
    Co-Authors: Teri James Bellis, Jeffrey Weihing, Gail D Chermak, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    Purpose To provide a commentary on “Auditory Processing Disorder and Auditory/Language Interventions: An Evidence-Based Systematic Review” by Fey et al. (2011). Method Examination of the conclusions drawn by Fey et al. (2011) in the context of the American Academy of Audiology (2010a, 2010b) and American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (2005a, 2005b, 2005c) guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Auditory Processing Disorder, the evidence cited therein, and other pertinent published reports. Results The review provided by Fey et al. (2011) is limited due to the exclusion of pertinent efficacy studies from their analysis, inclusion of studies that did not employ strictly Auditory-based therapies, and lack of well-defined experimental groups in many of the studies cited. Further, the questions posed by their literature review may not have addressed the efficacy of true Auditory interventions in the remediation of Auditory difficulties in children who have primary deficits in central Auditory proce...

  • Efficacy of Auditory Interventions for Central Auditory Processing Disorder: A Response to Fey et al. (2011)
    Language speech and hearing services in schools, 2012
    Co-Authors: Teri James Bellis, Jeffrey Weihing, Gail D Chermak, Frank E Musiek
    Abstract:

    To provide a commentary on "Auditory Processing Disorder and Auditory/Language Interventions: An Evidence-Based Systematic Review" by Fey et al. (2011). Examination of the conclusions drawn by Fey et al. (2011) in the context of the American Academy of Audiology (2010a, 2010b) and American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (2005a, 2005b, 2005c) guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Auditory Processing Disorder, the evidence cited therein, and other pertinent published reports. The review provided by Fey et al. (2011) is limited due to the exclusion of pertinent efficacy studies from their analysis, inclusion of studies that did not employ strictly Auditory-based therapies, and lack of well-defined experimental groups in many of the studies cited. Further, the questions posed by their literature review may not have addressed the efficacy of true Auditory interventions in the remediation of Auditory difficulties in children who have primary deficits in central Auditory Processing. A more comprehensive review than that done by Fey et al. (2011) would have better addressed the fundamental question of the efficacy of direct remediation activities for children with central Auditory Processing Disorder.