|
|
|
|
ARTICLES, PRESENTATIONS, AND
UNPUBLISHED RESEARCH RELATED TO SCAN AND SCAN-A TESTS
OF CENTRAL AUDITORY PROCESSING DISORDERS. Book ChaptersChang, W. and Keith, R.W. (2005) Central Auditory Processing Disorders; Assessment and Remediation. Chapter 17 in Neurotology, 2nd Editition. Jackler, RK and Brackmann, DE, Eds., Elsevier Mosby Publishers, Philadelphia.
Keith, R.W. 2002. Auditory Processing Disorders. In Auditory Disorders in School Children: Law-Identification-Remediation, Fourth Edition. Ed R Roeser and M Downs. Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers, New York.
Keith, R.W., 2002. Central Auditory Processing Disorders.
In Pediatric Audiological Medicine, Ed V. A chapter describing central auditory processing disorders and testing for CAPD. Keith, R.W. 2000. Diagnosing Central Auditory Processing
Disorders in Children. Chapter 15. Audiology:
Diagnosis, Treatment Strategies, and Practice Management. Eds. R. Roeser, H. Hosford-Dunn,
and M. Valente. Thieme
Medical and Scientific Publishers,
Keith, R.W. and Fallis, R.L., 1998. How Behavioral Tests of Central Auditory Processing Influence Management. Chapter 10. Children with Hearing Impairment Contemporary Trends. Eds. F. Bess, and B. Wilkerson. Center Press. P. 137-145 This manuscript overviews issues related to central auditory testing, purposes and approaches, and reviews management and remediation approaches. Keith RW. 1995. Tests of Central Auditory Processing. Chapter
5 in Auditory Disorders in School Children, Third Edition, Eds. R Roeser and M
Marlowe JA, Engels TL, Keith, RW. 1992. Screening
for Auditory Disorders in Psychiatric Hospitals. Chapter 25, pp 373-384. Screening Children for Auditory Function, Eds. FH Bess and
JW Hall.
Stach BA. 1992. Controversies in the Screening of
Central Auditory Processing Disorders. Chapter 5, pp 61-77. Screening
for Auditory Disorders in Psychiatric Hospitals. In Screening
Children for Auditory Function, Eds. FH Bess and JW Hall. This author asks the question, "Should mass screening of children for CAPD be carried out?" He discusses whether (in 1992) there is a clear definition of CAPD, whether it occurs frequently enough to be significant, and whether accurate diagnoses, treatment, facilities, cost-benefit and availability of screening tools warrants screening. His only Yes was on the issue of serious consequence. The author concludes that universal screening for CAPD should not be carried out. His position may have changed in view of the recent Bruton Conference report (Jerger and Musiek, JAAA, 2000) recommending a procedure for screening Auditory Processing Disorders in Children. Keith RW and Jerger S. 1991.
Central Auditory Disorders. Chapter 11, pp.
235-248. In Diagnostic Audiology, Eds. J Jacobson and JL
Northern. Pro-Ed, Journal Articles:Woods, A., Pena, E.D., Martin, F.N., (2004) Exploring Possible Socio-Cultural Bias on the SCAN-C. American Journal of Audiology, Vol 13, 173-184
Keith, R (2002) Standardization of the Time Compressed Sentence Test. Journal of Educational Audiology, Vol 10, pp 15-20.
English, K (2001) Assessing Auditory Processing Problems in the School Setting. Journal of Educational Audiology Vol 9. 42-46. This article presents an alternative test battery for identifying auditory processing problems. The battery is based on a two-dimensional model to auditory processing including “horizontal” and “vertical.” The battery is especially designed for use in a school setting by educational audiologists. The article is well written and presents an interesting model for assessment of auditory processing. Keith, R. (2002) Is evaluating auditory processing disorders in your scope of practice? The Hearing Journal, Vol 55. 10 and 14-17. This is an informal non-refereed question and answer article with personal opinions of auditory processing by the author. Emanual,
D. (2002) The Auditory
Processing This article presents a survey of auditory
processing diagnostic practices that was mailed to all licensed audiologists in
the State of Marriage, J. King, J, Lutman, M. (2001) The reliability of the SCAN test: results from a
primary school in the the
Tillery, K., Katz, J., and Keller, W.D., (2000) Effects of Methylphenidate (Ritalin) on Auditory Performance in Children with Attention and Auditory Processing Disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, Vol 43, pp 893-910.
Smith, T.T., Bradham, T, Chandler, L, and Wells, D. (2000) The effect of examiner's race on the performance of African-American children on the SCAN. Language, speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 31, 116-125
Keith, RW, Briggs, SR, House JJ, and Weiler, E (2000)
The Auditory Continuous Performance Test as Part of an ADHD Test Keith, R.W. (2000). Development and Standardization of SCAN-C: Test for
Auditory Processing Disorders in Children-Revised. Journal of the This paper reports on the development and standardization of SCAN-C: Test of Auditory Processing Disorders in Children, revised. A complete description of the subtests and standardization of the test is described. Scoring and interpretation of results is discussed. Shlomo,
S., This study examined cases of three normal-hearing children who were initially diagnosed as having a central auditory processing disorder and learning disability. CAP was performed on the subjects under the condition of no reinforcement and then with reinforcement. For all three cases, the CAP scores improved bilaterally with the provided reinforcement, as compared to the non-reinforcement. Keith, RW (1999) Clinical Issues in Central Auditory Processing Disorders. Language Speech and Hearing Services in the Schools, Vol 30, 339-334, 1999. Schow, R.L. and Chermak, G. (1999). Implications from Factor Analysis for Central Auditory Processing Disorders. American Journal of Audiology, Vol. 8, 137-142. (December, 1999) This study compared and contrasted findings on 331 school-aged children who were given two of the more common central auditory processing disorder tests, SSW and SCAN. Two factors emerged from these findings, an auditory binaural separation from completion factor and a monaural low redundancy degradation factor. The authors suggested that these findings would help to define the nature of processes probed by the SCAN and the SSW test. Feniman, M.R., Keith, R.W., and Fallis, R. (1999). Assessment of Auditory Processing in Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Language-Based Learning Impairments. Disturbios da Communicacao. 11(1): 9-27. This study, published in the journal of the Brazilian speech and audiology journal, provides data on competing sentence testing from SCAN-A and the Auditory Fusion Test- Revised on children with ADHD and Language Impairments. Keith, R.W., Young, M., and McCroskey, R., (1999). A Brief Introduction to the Auditory Fusion Test-Revised. Educational Audiology Review, spring 1999, p. 16-19. Reprinted in the electronic journal and available for viewing through the archives of articles in www.audiologyonline.com. This article defines temporal processing disorders, gives a brief overview of the revised auditory fusion test, and case histories for examples. Musiek,
F. (1999). Habilitation and Management of Auditory Processing Disorders:
Overview of Selected Procedures. Journal of the Keith, R.W. (1999). Treatment for Central Auditory Processing Disorders: Clinical Issues in Central Auditory Processing Disorders. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, Vol. 30, 339-344. This article defines CAPD, and what population should be targeted for this assessment. Fallis RL, Keith RW, and Warnick RE. (1998). Central Auditory Processing in a Patient with a Right Temporal Lobe Tumor: A Case Report. JAAA, Vol. 9, 1998, 299-304. This article presents results of central auditory testing on a 34-year-old male with a right temporal lobe tumor. SCAN-A, Auditory Fusion Test-Revised, Pitch Pattern Sequence Test, and the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (neuropsychological test of cognitive function) were administered. The results found post-operative decrease in auditory processing scores, with some improvement to baseline on the 2nd postoperative visit. Results are discussed in view of the contribution of central test findings to appropriate patient and family counseling. Oyler, R.F., Rosenhagen, K.M., Michael, M.L., (1998). Sensitivity and Specificity of Keith's Auditory Continuous Performance Test. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, Vol. 29, 180-185. This study used the Auditory Continuous Performance Test (ACPT) to evaluate one group of subjects who had been diagnosed as having attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder and a control group. Chermak GD, This report examines current central auditory
assessment practices and professional preparation audiologists receive in the Gomez R and Condon M. (1997). Central Auditory Processing Ability in AD/HD Children with and without Learning Disability. Submitted to the Journal of Learning Disabilities. (April 1997). This study administered SCAN and the Lindamood Auditory Conceptualization test to children with ADHD who were divided into two groups, those with learning disabilities and those with no learning disabilities. A normal group was studied for control. Results indicated lower central auditory processing ability in ADHD children with learning disabilities than the other two groups. The authors suggest that central auditory processing deficits are more likely to be associated with learning disabilities than ADHD. Middleton, M.L., Wilson, K.M., and Keith, R.W. (1997). Central Auditory Evaluation of Patients with Spasmodic Dysphonia. Ear, Nose, & Throat Journal, Vol. 76, No. 10, 710-711. This study (that received the editor's award for the year) investigated central auditory findings in patients with spasmodic dysphonia, including brainstem and cortical function. ABR and SCAN-A were used to test the subjects. Hunter, L.L. (1997). Diagnostic Audiology and Central Auditory Processing Disorders. Current Opinion in Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Vol. 5, No. 5, 308-311. Emerson MF, Crandall KK, Seikel JA and Chermak, GD (1997). Observations on the use of SCAN to identify children at risk for central auditory processing disorder. Language Speech and Hearing Services in the Schools. 28: 43-49. Keith, R.W., (1998). Comments on "The Use of SCAN to Identify Children at Risk for CAPD" by Emerson et al. 1997. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, Vol. 29, 117-119. Keith, R.W. (1996). Understanding Central Auditory Processing Disorders. The Hearing Journal, 49; 11, 20-28. Ricco, C.A., Morris, J.C., Hynd, G.W. and Keith, R.W. (1996). Validity of the Auditory Continuous Performance Test in differentiating central processing auditory disorders with and without ADHD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29; 5, 561-566 Cranford, J.L., Kennalley, T., Svoboda, W. and Hipp, K. (1996). Changes in central auditory processing following temporal lobectomies in children. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 7; 289-295. Five children age 11 to 16 years with unilateral temporal lobe ablations were followed to evaluate postoperative changes. Children were tested before surgery and at one-year post. Tests included SCAN, duration pattern and dichotic digits tests, and the P-300 EDP. With each test some children exhibited post-op improvement while others exhibited either no change or poorer post-op performance. The results indicate that temporal lobectomies, while controlling seizures, may not always result in improved central auditory processing. Keith, R.W. (1995). Development and standardization of SCAN-A: Test of auditory processing disorders in adolescents and adults. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 6:286-292. This paper reports on the development and standardization of SCAN-A: Test of Auditory Processing Disorders in Adolescents and Adults. A complete description of the original subtests, standardization process, and final version of the test is described. Scoring and cut-off for normal, questionable, and abnormal performance are suggested. Chermak, G.D, Styer, S.A. and Seikel, J.A. (1995). Comparing Screening tests of central auditory processing. The Hearing Journal. 48 (5): 29-34. This study compared SCAN and the SAAT as screening tools for identifying CAPD. Subjects were 14 children ages 4.5 to 8 years, all male, previously diagnosed as CAPD. Of the 14 subjects 11 fell below the 25%ile criterion on the SAAT, and 7 fell below the 16th percentile on SCAN. The FW test was the least discriminating, with AFG and CW tests identifying more children. A t-test for paired samples found no difference between the SCAN composite score and SAAT. CW test results were significantly poorer than either AFG or FW, and AFG was significantly poorer than the FW subtest. The author's note that the monaural FW subtest posed little challenge to the subjects, consistent with the premise that binaural tasks impose higher-level processing demands than monaural tasks. The authors suggest that SAAT and SCAN measure different but overlapping aspects of auditory processing, and the two screening tests do not consistently identify the same children at risk for CAPD. Zarrella, S. (1995). Category system, test battery enhances diagnosis and management of CAPD. ADVANCE for Speech-Language Pathologists & Audiologists, 6-7.
Deitrich, K.N., Succop, P.A., Berger, O.G. and Keith, R.W. (1992). Lead exposure and the central auditory processing abilities and cognitive development of urban children: the Cincinnati lead study cohort at age 5 years. Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 14(1):51-6. The purpose of this analysis was to examine the relationship between lead exposure and central auditory processing abilities and cognitive development of urban children age 5 years. The SCAN filtered words and auditory figure-ground subtests, and the Kaufman-ABC tests were used. Although the effects were small, higher prenatal, neonatal, and postnatal lead (PbB) levels were associated with poorer central auditory processing abilities on the filtered word subtest of SCAN. Higher lead levels were associated with poorer performance on all cognitive developmental subscales of the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children. Keith, R.W. and Engineer, P. (1991). Effects of methylphenidate on the auditory processing abilities of children with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 24; 10, 630-636. Investigation of effects of methylphenidate of auditory vigilance, auditory processing and receptive language of children with ADHD. Twenty subjects 7 - 13 years served as their own subject on and off of methylphenidate. The ACPT, SCAN, and Token Test for Children found significant improvement in performance on all measures when on methylphenidate. Katbamna, B., Johnson, J.L. and Keith, R.W. (1990). Auditory processing abilities in children with learning disabilities: A pilot study. Hearsay, Fall/Winter 125-131. Keith, R.W., Rudy, J., Donahue, P.A. and Katbamna, B. (1989). Comparison of SCAN results with other auditory language measures in a clinical population. Ear and Hearing, 10(6): 382-386. This study compared SCAN with SSW, Competing sentence test, PPVT, and CELF-R on 155 children ages 6 - 15 years. Results showed significant correlations between SCAN, SSW, and Competing Sentence test results except for Filtered Word and Auditory Figure Ground subtests of SCAN and the PPVT. The authors interpret these findings as indicating that AFG and FW tests measure different auditory processing abilities than those measured by dichotic tests. There were no significant correlations between SCAN and the CELF-R subtest. This latter finding is consistent with data published in the SCAN manual showing the SCAN and CELF measure different aspects of auditory processing. Ferre, J.M., Wilbur, L.A. (1986). Normal and Learning Disabled Children's Central Auditory Processing Skills: An Experimental Test Battery. Ear and Hearing, 7:5, 336-343 This study examined the performance of normal children and learning disabled children on an experimental battery of central auditory processing tasks. This battery included low-pass filtered speech, binaural fusion, time-compressed speech, and dichotic monosyllable tests. The learning disabled subjects were classified as having normal or significantly impaired auditory perceptual skills on the basis of a pretest battery of auditory language tests. The normal subjects tended to perform alike across measures, while the auditorily impaired subjects tended to perform significantly poorer than their normal age mates. The results emphasized the heterogeneity of the learning disabled population. The results also suggested a potentially useful "at risk" criterion when a CAP test battery is used in the assessment on auditory perceptual impairment among children. Presentations that incorporated SCAN, SCAN-A or the ACPT:Ziliotto, KN and Desgualdo, LD. (2005) Random Gap Detection Test in subjects with and without APD. Poster session presented to the annual convention of the American Academy of Audiology
Peacock, J and Moncrieff, C. (2002) Scan-C Normative Data for 10 and 11 Year Olds. Poster session presented to the annual convention of the American Academy of Audiology This study was conducted to study the SCAN-C normative data for 10 and 11 year olds. The authors conclude that “the standardization sample of the SCAN-C test may have included some children with undiagnosed APD and that normative data may under-represent true normal performance on this test.” As a comment, the SCAN-C normative data were based on testing children who were attending a normal school be able to take the test in English without modification, have normal symmetrical hearing and intelligible speech. There were no other exclusion criteria. The standardization sample fits a true psychometric normative data sampling technique. Bai Rossi, J. and Moncrieff, C. (2002) Sensitivity of the SCAN competing words subtest. Poster session presented to the annual convention of the American Academy of Audiology This study concludes that scoring ear advantage is more sensitive than either percentage or raw scoring methods are used in identifying auditory processing disorders. Kohtz, A., Fallis-Cunningham, R. and Keith, R.W., (2000). Reversed Cerebral Dominance for Language in an Eight-Year-Old Boy: A Neurophysiological Basis for Language and Learning Problems. Poster Session, presented at Annual AAA convention. Davis, R., Geffner, D., Lucker, J., and Koch, W. (1998) Prevalence of ADHD, Central Auditory Processing Disorders and Early Otitis Media in Children. Poster Session Presented at AAA Convention. April 2, 1998. Cranford, J.L., Kennalley, T., Svoboda, W., and Hipp, K. (1996). Changes in Central Auditory Processing Following Temporal Lobectomies in Children. Journal American Academy of Audiology, 7: 289-295 For this study, children were tested before surgery, and 1 year after surgery. The testes included the SCAN, the duration pattern and dichotic Digits tests, and the P300 event-related potential. The authors reported that Temporal Lobectomies may not always result in improved central auditory processing. Millay, K and Bird, A. The SCAN and TAPS: Language disorders or CAPD? (1996). Presentation at Texas Speech and Hearing Association, annual convention. McCaffrey, H. and Klecan-Aker, J. An integrated battery for diagnosing CAPD: Profiling speech-language and audiologic measures. (1996). Presentation at Texas Speech and Hearing Association, annual convention. Geffner, D., Davis, R. and Koch, W. Relationship of ADD, central auditory processing, and early otitis media in children. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Audiology, November, 1996. A review of 240 children w/ ADD found CAPD as measured by SCAN, SSW and Speech in Noise was present in 93.1%. Prevalence of OME in children with ADD and CAPD was 46.7%, a considerable difference than expected in a non-ADD population. Herod, L.A. and Shapiro, S.K. SCAN and auditory vigilance test performance in ADHD children. Technical session presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, November, 1994. Wall, L.G., Sreenivas, C and Fox, R.A. P300 latency, the SSW and the SCAN-A: A comparison. Technical session presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, November, 1994. This study evaluated the P300 response latency, the SSW, and SCAN-A for a group of adults ages 65-73. Results were not reported in the abstract. Lechner, W., Reber, C.K. and Turton, L.J. Validation of CHAPPS as a screening survey for CAPD. Technical session presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, November, 1994. Twelve children diagnosed as ADD were administered SCAN, SSW and CHAPPS. The CHAPPS identified 5 children with CAPD as confirmed by SCAN and SSW. This study validates the use of CHAPPS. Reber, C.K., Lechner, W. and Turton, L.J. Clinical prompts, central auditory processing, and attention deficit disorders. Technical session presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, November, 1994. The effects of prompts on results of CAP testing with children diagnosed as ADD was compared to the effect on 12 children without ADD. The results of the study separated the children with ADD into an ADD and ADD/CAPD group. The prompts increased the scores for all children. The CAPD group benefited the least from two trials with SCAN and scored lowest on the competing words subtest. Keith, R.W. Standardization of SCAN-A: A test for auditory processing disorders in adolescents and adults. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Audiology, April, 1993. Published in JAAA under the same title. Schow, R.L., Newman, M.T. and Vause, M. Relationships among SCAN and SSW test results. Paper read at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Rehabilitative Audiology, June, 1992. Comparison of 155 children age 6 to 13 years on SCAN and SSW tests. Investigators report that results were consistent with Keith et al (1989) in comparing SCAN with other auditory test results. A low score on both SSW and SCAN competing word test (both dichotic tests) was found. Results support general psychometric adequacy and consistency of the SSW and SCAN. Seikel JA and Emerson MF (1991) Chronic otitis media and auditory processing: results using the SCAN. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. November 22-25. The SCAN and PPVT-R were used to study 28 children from grades kindergarten through three who, based on parent report, had experienced six of more episodes of otitis media before age three years. Controls had less than 2 episodes of OM in the same time period. Results failed to yield any significant differences between OM and controls, though there was a trend towards depressed performance in the experimental group, especially on the filtered word test. The authors noted that 23% of controls and 43% of experimental subjects fell 1 SD below the SCAN standardized mean. They considered that universally depressed scores on SCAN. Testing was done according to descriptions in the manual, which postulate that the poor scores show the wide response variability reported for tests of auditory processing, or that the result was from testing in a quiet room and that testing in a sound proof booth would have eliminated the poor results. Smaldino J and Burk J, Evaluation of Attention Deficits in Children. Abstract published in the AAS Bulletin, Vol. 15, No. 1, September, 1990. Page 11. Presented to the 1990 Annual Conference of the American Auditory Society. Children in third and fourth grade with recurrent otitis media were compared to children with no such history on the research version of the ACPT. A one target versus two-target word version of ACPT was used. No significant difference was found in hits, misses or false positives at either grade level. Delayed responses significantly differentiated students with histories of frequent versus few episodes of OM. Unpublished manuscripts, theses and dissertations:Tillery, K.L., and Katz, J. (1999). Comparison of Teacher and Patient Ratings of Children with CAPD to Children with ADHD and CAPD: Utilization of the CHAPPs Questionaire. In preparation (Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools. The authors have indicated that this article is a retrospective analysis of parent and teacher ratings of listening behaviors on the Children's Auditory Processing Performance Scale. Bodkin, K.A., Madell, J.R., Rosenfeld, R.M. (1999). Word Recognition in Quiet and Noise for Normally Developing Children. Unpublished Manuscript. The Long Island College Hospital, Division of Otolaryngology Strouse, N., and Wilson, R.H. (1998). Recognition of dichotic digits under pre-cued and post-cued response conditions in young and elderly listeners. This paper reports on the development and standardization of SCAN-A: Test of Auditory Processing Disorders in Adolescents and Adults. A complete description of the original subtests, standardization process, and final version of the test is described. Scoring and cut-off for normal, questionable, and abnormal performance are suggested. (Submitted to British Journal of Audiology) Schow, R. and Chermak, G. (1999). Implications from factor analysis of SSW and SCAN. American Journal of Audiology, pp. 137-142.
Robinson, S (1997) Monaural and binaural speech reception thresholds in normal children and those at risk for central auditory processing disorders. Ph.D. Dissertation.
Feniman M. (1997). Central auditory test findings in subjects with language learning disorders and ADHD. Research conducted at the Cincinnati Center for Developmental Disabilities, R.W. Keith advisor. Manuscript in preparation. Subjects age 7 to 9 years with ADHD were studied to determine performance on SCAN-A competing sentence and the Auditory Fusion Test-Revised. Walls G, (1997). Central Auditory Processing Skills in Language Learning Impaired Children. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Cincinnati. RW Keith, faculty advisor. This study examined central auditory processing skills of 17 children ages 6 years 3 months to 10 years 5 months suspected of having a language-based learning disability. Results of SCAN, the competing sentence test of SCAN-A, the Auditory Fusion Test-Revised, and Fisher's Auditory Problems Checklist were compared to results from receptive and expressive language measures. Significant correlations were obtained between results of the SCAN Composite score, the competing word subtest, the competing sentence right-ear test and expressive language. The competing word subtest was found to significantly correlate with receptive language. The majority of auditory tests did not significantly correlate to either tests of receptive or expressive language. From this group of tests only one child was diagnosed as having CAPD. The results suggest that language-based learning disabilities and CAPD are separate entities. Colorado Department of Education, (1997). Central auditory processing disorders: A team approach to screening, assessment and intervention practices. This document provides guidelines for central auditory screening to fulfill the Colorado Department of Education rules for qualifying for special education and related services. Included as appropriate auditory screening measures are SCAN, SCAN-A, the ACPT, SAT, and PSI. Bankaitis, A.E., (1996). The effects of HIV-infection on SCAN-A Performance: Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cincinnati, RW Keith, faculty advisor. This study focused on the effects of varying degrees of HIV-infection on the overall performance on the SCAN-A. Three groups of normal hearing adult males, two groups representing varying degrees of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) - infection and one comparison HIV-negative group, served as subjects. The results revealed that both the group with AIDS and that with asymptomatic HIV-infection performed significantly poorer than the HIV-negative group. Kamara, C.A. (1996). Audition and writing characteristics of dyslexic children. Unpublished Manuscript. Washington, DC. Forty elementary children identified in a multi-disciplinary assessment as learning disabled were compared to 56 children in regular education for their performance on SCAN, the Test of Written Language-2, and the Test of Language Development-revised. Results found that all SCAN scores were significantly poorer for the LD groups than normal children. Ear advantage did not significantly separate LD and normal children except for the left ear advantage, left ear-first task. There was a poor description of dyslexia although there is evidence that the control subjects were normal, and the children labeled learning disabled were not normally achieving children. The normal achieving children all scored with Standard Scores of 11.5 to 12.0 and composite scores of 111.9. This data confirms the normative results published in the SCAN manual. They contradict the findings of Seikel and Emerson who reported that their normals performed below SCAN normal means. Carpenter, D. M. (1996). The reassessment of central auditory processing disorders in children 7 to 12 years of age. Independent study project. Central Institute for the Deaf. Roanne Karzon, Ph.D., Supervisor. The purpose of this study was to re-evaluate 9 children previously tested between 1990 and 1994 at St. Louis Children's hospital to determine which recommendations were most useful for parents, and to determine whether test scores changes over the course of 2 to 6 years. Fifty-five children between 7 and 12 years were tested with combinations of SCAN, TAPS, and GFW selective attention test. Significant changes were based on the 80% confidence interval for SCAN and 95% for TAPS. CAP scores were considered to be normal if they fell >25% percentile. On the SCAN, 4/9 children improved on the FW test, on the AFG one child did better and one poorer, on the CW 3 children performed significantly better and 4 children significantly worse. Group means did not change and are not helpful in the analysis. The author also reviewed recommendations made previously for their usefulness to parents.
Garvey, J. (1995) Sensitivity of the Woodcock-Johnson Psychoeducational Battery-Revised and the SCAN in Predicting Central Auditory Processing Disorders. Ph.D. Dissertation.
Herod, L. (1994). Discriminate validity of visual and auditory tasks in a sample of ADHD children. Unpublished manuscript/dissertation? Auburn University. Also: Herod, L.A. and Shapiro, S.K. SCAN and auditory vigilance test performance in ADHD children. Technical session presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, November 1994. A combination of auditory and visual tasks, including SCAN and ACPT were given to 27 children with ADHD and their age-matched controls. Children with ADHD performed significantly poorer on most measures, with auditory measures being somewhat better than visual at discriminating the groups. These authors studied a variety of auditory and visual tests to determine the most efficient method of determining whether ADHD children have modality specific deficits. Gaunder, A. (1993). A comparison of performances of good readers and poor readers on the SCAN-A test and the Revised Token test. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati. SCAN-A and Token Test performance on good and poor readers age 12 to 15 years were obtained. Absolute and ear advantage scores were compared between the two groups. Results indicate that good readers significantly outperformed poor readers on the competing words test, but not on the filtered words and auditory figure-ground tests. Another components of the SCAN-A the good readers performed better than the poor readers, but the differences were not significant. Good readers had significantly fewer reversals on the Competing Words Test than poor readers (alpha .05). The left ear score was significantly poorer for poor readers than good readers. Generally the Token Test results were not significantly different for the two groups. Combs K.A. (1992). Effects of methylphenidate on auditory processing abilities of children with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati. This thesis reports two cases of children with well documented ADD who were tested with the ACPT on different levels of Ritalin. The results found that both children scored significantly better on the ACPT while on the high dosage of Ritalin, and poorest while on the placebo. McLean-Cwikowski, B.A. (1992). Comparison of blends and reversals in the SCAN Competing Word subtest on children suspected of language, learning and auditory processing disorder and children enrolled in a learning disabled classroom. Unpublished Masters Thesis, University of Cincinnati Two groups of children with language, learning and auditory processing disorders were compared. Subjects were 20 children age 7 to 11 years. Students enrolled in middle socioeconomic learning disabled classrooms scored significantly higher on all aspects of SCAN and made fewer blends and reversals on SCAN competing word test than children from low socioeconomic learning disabled classroom. The low SE children scored significantly lower and made more blends and reversals on SCAN CW test. In addition, the study found that scoring blends and reversals (as done in the SSW test) does not add valuable information to the value of the Competing Words Test. Subjects with low and high Token and SCAN test scores had both low and high number of blends and reversals. Santucci, G.M. (1991) A correlation study of auditory processing performance and cognitive processing style in children suspected of auditory perceptual disorders. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, St. Louis University This study investigated performance of 40 children ages 7 through 11 years of the SCAN and Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC). All subjects had normal hearing but showed evidence of auditory processing difficulties on the SCAN. The results found:
Spafford, D. A. (1990). Central auditory processing: Relationship between central auditory processing and intellectual and academic functioning in learning disabled children with reading problems. Ph.D. dissertation, Brigham Young University, Salt Lake City. This study examined whether scores on the WISC-R, SCAN, SSW, and WJ-R ACH were significantly different between children with a learning disability in reading and those without. It was found that 36.6% of children with reading difficulties also had CAPD, as shown by the SSW and composite score of SCAN. Fifty percent of the children with learning disabilities also exhibited significant difficulty on the AFG subtest of SCAN. Rogers, K.L. (1989). Test-retest repeatability of the auditory evoked middle latency response in normal-hearing adults aged 22 to 36 years old. Master's thesis, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati. This study obtained competing words subtest results from the SCAN (designed for children 6 to 11 years.) The results confirmed that the competing words subtest would work well for adults, leading to inclusion of the CW test in SCAN-A. Martin, S.T. (1988). Analysis of tests frequently utilized in detecting central auditory processing deficits in learning disabled children. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Oregon Doctoral dissertation comparing normal and learning disabled children on a large group of central auditory and language tests, including SCAN. Statistical analysis of results found that 10 tests/subtests contributed to identification of learning disabled children with 91.6% accuracy. That battery included SCAN competing words (highly significant) and filtered words and auditory-figure ground, (less significant). The author's opinion was that the SCAN FW and AFG tests were not sufficiently difficult to clearly differentiate normal from learning disabled children but that the tests should be included in the test battery. The SCAN CW subtest was very good in separating groups. Ear advantage was significantly poorer in LD children than normals on CW subtest, similar to SSW. The results were consistent with McLean-Cwikowski (1992) who found no significant difference between groups for total number of reversals in word order on the SSW. Stromberg, EM (1988), Comparison of school day scripts and auditory processing test scores of regular education second graders to a teacher rating for ability to follow classroom oral directions. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cincinnati, This study investigated children's performance on auditory processing tests including SCAN, and scripts for the school day routine and compared them to teacher rating scales for the ability to follow classroom directions. High performance on the CW subtest and composite SCAN scores was associated with higher teacher rating scales. The results of these 50 children are well distributed around the published SCAN normal means, providing early validating data for the SCAN normative data. Ormson, K. A study of the performance on auditory processing tests and Conners rating scales as discriminates of chlordane having ADHD. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Texas Tech University. This study examined the relationship of observed behaviors of children having ADHD and their performance on the SCAN test. Thirty-six children ranging in age from 6 years 7 months to 11 years 11 months were studied. IQ scores ranged from 87 to 112. All children had normal hearing. The behaviors were rated using the Conners Rating Scale (CRS), parent's version. A score above 70 is interpreted as very much above average. As a group the subjects performed more than 1 SD below the SCAN norm mean for all subtests and the composite score. The study found that children having ADHD who had CRS scores greater than 89 also had SCAN test performance scores poor enough to cause them to also be diagnosed as having CAPD. The author suggests that there is a co-morbid relationship between ADHD children having high behavior rating scale scores and poor auditory processing performance. The implication of the study is that children who perform poorly on the SCAN and have high CRS scores above 89 should be considered as having CAPD and are at extreme risk for having co-occurring ADHD.
|
