TY -的盟Bexelius Christin AU - Honeth路易丝AU -埃克曼,亚历山德拉AU -埃里克森,米凯尔盟——Sandin斯文盟——Bagger-Sjoback丹盟利顿,Jan-Eric PY - 2008 DA - 2008/10/21 TI -评价与建立一个基于互联网的听力Test-Comparison方法检测听力损失乔- J地中海互联网Res SP - e32六世- 10 - 4 KW -听力测试KW -听力测定,纯音KW -互联网千瓦问卷KW -千瓦流行病学队列研究AB -背景:临床纯音听谱是最准确地测量听力损害的方法。这种方法不适用于大规模的、基于人群的流行病学研究，因为它要求研究参与者到有训练有素人员的诊所就诊。测量听力能力的另一种方法是通过问卷进行自我评估，但与临床听力测试的相关性有所不同。目的:评估一个基于互联网的听力测试试点与一个关于自我估计听力的问题的比较，以及在20-60岁的瑞典猎人协会560名成员中使用基于互联网的听力测试和基于互联网的问卷的可行性。方法:2007年3月向参与者邮寄了一份邀请，连同研究网站的URL、个人用户名和密码。该网站包括调查问卷、听力测试和参与研究的说明。听力测试类似于临床试听图，呈现500至8000赫兹之间的6个音调。提示音在0 ~ 60 dB之间，参与者按空格键响应提示音。听力测试需要耳机，并且基于JAVA编程。 Before the participant can start the hearing test, it has to be calibrated against a reference person with good hearing between 15 and 35 years of age. Results: After 5 months, 162 out of 560 (29%) had answered the questionnaire, out of which 88 (16%) had completed the hearing test. Those who actively declined participation numbered 230 out of 560 (41%). After removing duplicates and hearing tests calibrated by unreliable reference data, 61 hearing tests remained for analysis. The prevalence of hearing impairment from the Internet-based hearing test was 20% (12 out of 61), compared to 52% (32 out of 61) from the self-estimated question. Those who completed the hearing test were older than the non-participants, and more had headphones (P = .003) and the correct version of the JAVA program (P = .007) than those who only answered the questionnaire. Conclusions: Though an Internet-based hearing test cannot replace a clinical pure-tone audiogram conducted by a trained audiologist, it is a valid and useful screening tool for hearing ability in a large population carried out at a low cost. SN - 1438-8871 UR - //www.mybigtv.com/2008/4/e32/ UR - https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1065 UR - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18940783 DO - 10.2196/jmir.1065 ID - info:doi/10.2196/jmir.1065 ER -