On the Accuracy and Repeatability of Occupational Audiograms Obtained by Non-Audiologists
Brian C J Moore1, Graham Cox, David A Lowe
1From the Cambridge Hearing Group, Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK (B.C.J.M.); ENT Department (Retired), Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK (G.C.); ENT Department, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, Cleveland, UK (D.A.L.); and Cambridge Hearing Group, MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK (H.E.G.).
Objective:
Occupational audiograms are obtained during military service to check for possible hearing damage and to assess fitness for duty. This paper compares the accuracy and repeatability of audiograms obtained by non-audiologists and trained audiologists.
Methods:
Data from published papers on the accuracy and repeatability of audiograms obtained by audiologists and non-audiologists were assessed.
Results:
Audiograms obtained by non-audiologists showed systematic deviations from those obtained by audiologists and showed far poorer repeatability (by a factor of about 1.8).
Conclusions:
It is recommended that (1) occupational audiograms obtained by non-audiologists not be used for the diagnosis or quantification of noise-induced hearing loss and (2) occupational audiograms be obtained by independent and fully trained audiologists or be obtained using an automated system that includes methods for the detection of false positives and inconsistent responses.
Related Concept Videos
01:13Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
01:52Accuracy and Precision
03:37Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision