Auditory Processing DisorderNCT05452486
Auditory Processing in Spanish-English Bilinguals: Is Performance Better When Tested in Spanish or English?
A study testing English APD assessment and Spanish APD assessment in people with Auditory Processing Disorder, run by University of Arkansas at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to learn more about how bilingual individuals process sound in challenging listening environments and how testing language may impact results on auditory processing assessments. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 55 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Auditory Processing Disorder
- What is being tested?
- English APD assessment and Spanish APD assessment
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 29 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 25 Jul 2022to 16 Nov 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 55 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Bilingual Spanish-English speakers
- Must have learned Spanish first followed by English
- Proficiency in both languages
- Normal hearing
Who cannot join
- Hearing loss
- History of traumatic brain injuries (TBI)
- Neurological issues
- Auditory processing concerns
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205
About this study
Official title: Comparing Central Auditory Processing Performance in Bilinguals Using L1 vs. L2 Materials
The purpose of this study is to learn more about how bilingual individuals process sound in challenging listening environments and how testing language may impact results on auditory processing assessments. Auditory processing evaluations assess specific auditory skills necessary to hear and understand complex auditory signals, but many of these tests rely heavily on language. This poses an issue for individuals with native languages other than English because the test results may not clearly identify whether performance is due to an auditory processing problem or to the language used in the test materials. This study aims to identify whether auditory processing performance differs in Spanish-English bilinguals based on the language of the test materials used (English vs. Spanish). Ultimately, the results of this study may aid in more accurate diagnoses and treatment of auditory processing disorders in bilingual individuals.
Read the detailed description
Auditory processing disorder (APD) is a disorder caused by a disruption within the central auditory pathway that impairs processing of complex or degraded auditory inputs. Patients with this condition often present with normal hearing but still report problems understanding speech. This commonly manifests as individuals having difficulty understanding speech in challenging listening environments (e.g., noisy backgrounds, reverberant environments, rapid speech), localizing sounds, and following complex auditory directions. An underlying auditory skill vital to these processes is binaural processing, or the ability to utilize auditory cues from both ears. Binaural processing aids in identifying a talker in the midst of background noise and allows us to better separate relevant from irrelevant inputs.
While auditory processing evaluations assess specific auditory skills (like binaural processing) necessary for efficient processing and understanding of complex auditory signals, many of the tests rely heavily on language. This poses an issue for individuals for whom English is not their native language. Because the tests are linguistically loaded, the obtained results do not clearly identify whether an issue should be attributed to a central auditory problem or to the language used in the test materials. Thus, audiologists are often hesitant to test bilingual patients who demonstrate features of APD.
It is possible that bilingual individuals would perform more favorably when tested in their native language (L1). Indeed, differences in complex auditory task performance have been seen in Spanish-English bilinguals when materials were presented in Spanish versus English. Recent studies have evaluated test-language effects in bilingual education and described significant improvements in performance when bilinguals were instructed and tested in their native language (L1) compared to performance in their later acquired language (L2). Numerous studies have also assessed monolingual vs. bilingual performance in complex auditory tasks including listening in noise, auditory memory, and competing speech. While much research in auditory processing of bilingual speakers compares performance between monolinguals and bilinguals, evidence to inform best clinical practice in the assessment of APD in bilinguals is lacking. To date, relatively few studies investigate performance within the same participant with testing language being the differential factor.
Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare binaural processing performance in Spanish-English bilingual participants when tested in Spanish (L1) versus in English (L2). Based on prior literature, we suspect that bilingual participants will perform better when they are instructed and presented with assessments in their native language versus when they are assessed in their later acquired language (L2). However, it is possible that our participants, who will be proficient in both L1 and L2, will show no difference in task performance. Regardless, by comparing binaural processing performance in bilingual participants, we will clarify whether testing bilingual individuals in a secondary language (when proficient in that language) results in valid and reliable measures of their auditory processing abilities. Thus, our results will provide evidence to establish best clinical practice when evaluating bilingual listeners for auditory processing deficits. This will enable clinicians to more confidently evaluate and diagnose auditory processing disorders in bilingual populations.
- Conditions
- Auditory Processing Disorder
- Being tested
- English APD assessment, Spanish APD assessment
- Keywords
- bilingual, Spanish
- Medical subject headings
- Auditory Perceptual Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
English APD assessmentDiagnostic test
Materials presented in English
Spanish APD assessmentDiagnostic test
Materials presented in Spanish
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| L1 First | Experimental | All participants will receive both experimental conditions (i.e., test materials in English, test materials in Spanish) in a counterbalanced order. Individuals in this arm receive Spanish materials first, then English test materials. Receives: Diagnostic Test: English APD assessment; Diagnostic Test: Spanish APD assessment |
| L2 First | Experimental | All participants will receive both experimental conditions (i.e., test materials in English, test materials in Spanish) in a counterbalanced order. Individuals in this arm receive English materials first, then Spanish test materials. Receives: Diagnostic Test: English APD assessment; Diagnostic Test: Spanish APD assessment |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Mean Difference in Scores for APD Assessment Using English vs. Spanish Materials
The APD assessment will include sub-tests (dichotic digits, dichotic word listening test, synthetic sentence identification test). Participants' performance will be scored as percent correct for each sub-test.
Measured: 90 minutes
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 Jul 2022
- Study start25 Jul 2022
- Primary completion16 Nov 2022
- Study completion16 Nov 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Auditory Processing DisorderStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- This study is a repeated measures experimental design in which participants will complete auditory processing tests in both English (L2) and Spanish (L1). The presentation of Spanish and English test materials will be counterbalanced across participants to minimize fatigue and practice effects.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 29 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Arkansas
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05452486
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 274429
- Status last verified
- May 2024
- First submitted
- 6 Jul 2022
- Last updated
- 19 Sep 2024
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.). Central Auditory Processing Disorder. (Practice Portal). Retrieved May 17, 2022, from www.asha.org/Practice-Portal/Clinical-Topics/Central-Auditory-Processing-Disorder/.
Canz, T., Piesche, N., Dallinger, S., & Jonkmann, K. (2021). Test-language effects in bilingual education: Evidence from CLIL classes in Germany. Learning and Instruction, 75, 101499.
Lopez, S.M., Martin, F.N., & Thibodeau, L.M. (1997). Performance of monolingual and bilingual speakers of English and Spanish on the Synthetic Sentence Identification Test. American Journal of Audiology, 6(3), 33-38.
Fuente A, McPherson B. Auditory processing tests for Spanish-speaking adults: an initial study. Int J Audiol. 2006 Nov;45(11):645-59. doi: 10.1080/14992020600937238.
PubMed 17118907
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 19 Sep 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparing Central Auditory Processing Performance in Bilinguals Using L1 vs. L2 Materials
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05452486
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 274429
- Conditions
- Auditory Processing Disorder
- Keywords
- bilingual, Spanish
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 29 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of ArkansasUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 25 Jul 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 16 Nov 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 16 Nov 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 11 Jul 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 19 Sep 2024
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to learn more about how bilingual individuals process sound in challenging listening environments and how testing language may impact results on auditory processing assessments. Auditory processing evaluations assess specific auditory skills necessary to hear and understand complex auditory signals, but many of these tests rely heavily on language. This poses an issue for individuals with native languages other than English because the test results may not clearly identify whether performance is due to an auditory processing problem or to the language used in the test materials. This study aims to identify whether auditory processing performance differs in Spanish-English bilinguals based on the language of the test materials used (English vs. Spanish). Ultimately, the results of this study may aid in more accurate diagnoses and treatment of auditory processing disorders in bilingual individuals.
Detailed description
Auditory processing disorder (APD) is a disorder caused by a disruption within the central auditory pathway that impairs processing of complex or degraded auditory inputs. Patients with this condition often present with normal hearing but still report problems understanding speech. This commonly manifests as individuals having difficulty understanding speech in challenging listening environments (e.g., noisy backgrounds, reverberant environments, rapid speech), localizing sounds, and following complex auditory directions. An underlying auditory skill vital to these processes is binaural processing, or the ability to utilize auditory cues from both ears. Binaural processing aids in identifying a talker in the midst of background noise and allows us to better separate relevant from irrelevant inputs.
While auditory processing evaluations assess specific auditory skills (like binaural processing) necessary for efficient processing and understanding of complex auditory signals, many of the tests rely heavily on language. This poses an issue for individuals for whom English is not their native language. Because the tests are linguistically loaded, the obtained results do not clearly identify whether an issue should be attributed to a central auditory problem or to the language used in the test materials. Thus, audiologists are often hesitant to test bilingual patients who demonstrate features of APD.
It is possible that bilingual individuals would perform more favorably when tested in their native language (L1). Indeed, differences in complex auditory task performance have been seen in Spanish-English bilinguals when materials were presented in Spanish versus English. Recent studies have evaluated test-language effects in bilingual education and described significant improvements in performance when bilinguals were instructed and tested in their native language (L1) compared to performance in their later acquired language (L2). Numerous studies have also assessed monolingual vs. bilingual performance in complex auditory tasks including listening in noise, auditory memory, and competing speech. While much research in auditory processing of bilingual speakers compares performance between monolinguals and bilinguals, evidence to inform best clinical practice in the assessment of APD in bilinguals is lacking. To date, relatively few studies investigate performance within the same participant with testing language being the differential factor.
Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare binaural processing performance in Spanish-English bilingual participants when tested in Spanish (L1) versus in English (L2). Based on prior literature, we suspect that bilingual participants will perform better when they are instructed and presented with assessments in their native language versus when they are assessed in their later acquired language (L2). However, it is possible that our participants, who will be proficient in both L1 and L2, will show no difference in task performance. Regardless, by comparing binaural processing performance in bilingual participants, we will clarify whether testing bilingual individuals in a secondary language (when proficient in that language) results in valid and reliable measures of their auditory processing abilities. Thus, our results will provide evidence to establish best clinical practice when evaluating bilingual listeners for auditory processing deficits. This will enable clinicians to more confidently evaluate and diagnose auditory processing disorders in bilingual populations.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This study is a repeated measures experimental design in which participants will complete auditory processing tests in both English (L2) and Spanish (L1). The presentation of Spanish and English test materials will be counterbalanced across participants to minimize fatigue and practice effects.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| L1 First | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: English APD assessment, Diagnostic Test: Spanish APD assessmentAll participants will receive both experimental conditions (i.e., test materials in English, test materials in Spanish) in a counterbalanced order. Individuals in this arm receive Spanish materials first, then English test materials. |
| L2 First | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: English APD assessment, Diagnostic Test: Spanish APD assessmentAll participants will receive both experimental conditions (i.e., test materials in English, test materials in Spanish) in a counterbalanced order. Individuals in this arm receive English materials first, then Spanish test materials. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 55 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Bilingual Spanish-English speakers
- Must have learned Spanish first followed by English
- Proficiency in both languages
- Normal hearing
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Hearing loss
- History of traumatic brain injuries (TBI)
- Neurological issues
- Auditory processing concerns
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| English APD assessmentMaterials presented in English | Diagnostic test | L1 First, L2 First |
| Spanish APD assessmentMaterials presented in Spanish | Diagnostic test | L1 First, L2 First |
Primary outcome
Mean Difference in Scores for APD Assessment Using English vs. Spanish Materials
Time frame: 90 minutes
The APD assessment will include sub-tests (dichotic digits, dichotic word listening test, synthetic sentence identification test). Participants' performance will be scored as percent correct for each sub-test.
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 19 Sep 2024.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- BackgroundAmerican Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.). Central Auditory Processing Disorder. (Practice Portal). Retrieved May 17, 2022, from www.asha.org/Practice-Portal/Clinical-Topics/Central-Auditory-Processing-Disorder/.
- BackgroundCanz, T., Piesche, N., Dallinger, S., & Jonkmann, K. (2021). Test-language effects in bilingual education: Evidence from CLIL classes in Germany. Learning and Instruction, 75, 101499.
- BackgroundLopez, S.M., Martin, F.N., & Thibodeau, L.M. (1997). Performance of monolingual and bilingual speakers of English and Spanish on the Synthetic Sentence Identification Test. American Journal of Audiology, 6(3), 33-38.
- Background: PubMed 17118907Fuente A, McPherson B. Auditory processing tests for Spanish-speaking adults: an initial study. Int J Audiol. 2006 Nov;45(11):645-59. doi: 10.1080/14992020600937238.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Auditory Processing Disorder
Not yet recruiting
The Hear Clear Study
Hearing Loss
Recruiting
BiOfeedback, Online for Sibilant Treatment
Speech Sound Disorder
Recruiting
Online Rotating Delivery of Perception/Production Enhanced Treatment for Rhotics
Speech Sound Disorder
Recruiting
Listening Effort in Cochlear Implant Users
Auditory Perception; Abnormal, Hearing Loss, Sensorineural
Recruiting
Central Auditory Processing Modulation Underlying Anxiety Reduction Using Clinically Designed Improvisatory Music
Alzheimer's Disease
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing English APD assessment and Spanish APD assessment in people with Auditory Processing Disorder, run by University of Arkansas at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 19 Sep 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 19 Sep 2024). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Mean Difference in Scores for APD Assessment Using English vs. Spanish Materials (time frame: 90 minutes). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05452486, which also lists 4 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 19 Sep 2024.