Objective: Mobile hearing test applications allow users to assess their hearing thresholds directly on their personal phones. While numerous studies have evaluated the validity and reliability of these applications, the impact of different mobile phones on test results has not been thoroughly investigated. This study aims to investigate how mobile hearing test results vary based on the mobile phone used. Material and Methods: Air conduction hearing thresholds of 78 participants with normal hearing, aged 18-25 years (20.961.13) were determined with Hearing Test (e-audiologia.pl) and uHear applications in a quiet environment (<30 dBA), on both Android and iOS-based reference phones, as well as the participants' personal mobile phones. The results of the applications on the reference phone and the participants' phones and the results of both applications on the reference phone were compared. Results: The Hearing Test (e-audiologia.pl) thresholds were significantly lower than the uHear at all frequencies bilaterally (p<0.05). 4000-6000 Hz in the right ear and 1000, 4000, and 6000 Hz in the left ear thresholds in the Hearing Test (e-audiologia.pl) were significantly better on the reference phone (p<0.05). Also, in the uHear, hearing thresholds were significantly better on the reference phone at 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz bilaterally and on the participants' phones at 4000 Hz in the left ear (p<0.05). Conclusion: Mobile hearing test applications may yield varying results across different mobile phones. Manufacturers and researchers should account for these device-related variations when designing and evaluating such tests.
Keywords: Mobile applications; hearing tests; telemedicine
Amaç: Mobil işitme testi uygulamaları, kullanıcıların kendi cihazlarını kullanarak işitme eşiklerini belirlemelerini sağlar. Çok sayıda çalışma bu uygulamaların geçerlilik ve güvenilirliğini değerlendirmiş olsa da farklı cep telefonlarının test sonuçları üzerindeki etkisi kapsamlı bir şekilde araştırılmamıştır. Bu çalışma, mobil işitme testi sonuçlarının kullanılan cep telefonuna bağlı olarak nasıl değiştiğini incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: 18-25 yaş arası normal işitmeye sahip 78 katılımcının (20,96±1,13) hava yolu işitme eşikleri, sessiz bir ortamda (<30dBA), Android ve iOS tabanlı referans telefonlarda ve katılımcıların kendi cep telefonlarında Hearing Test (e-audiologia.pl) ve uHear uygulamaları ile belirlenmiştir. Uygulamaların referans telefon ve katılımcıların telefonlarındaki sonuçları ile her iki uygulamanın referans telefondaki sonuçları karşılaştırılmıştır. Bulgular: İşitme Testi (e-audiologia.pl) eşikleri bilateral tüm frekanslarda uHear uygulamasından anlamlı derecede daha düşük elde edilmiştir (p<0,05). İşitme Testi (e-audiologia.pl) uygulamasında sağ kulakta 4000-6000 Hz ve sol kulakta 1000, 4000 ve 6000 Hz eşikleri referans telefonda anlamlı derecede daha iyi elde edilmiştir (p<0,05). Ek olarak, uHear uygulamasında bilateral 500, 1000 ve 2000 Hz'de referans telefonda ve sol kulakta 4000 Hz'de katılımcıların kendi telefonlarında işitme eşikleri anlamlı derecede daha iyi elde edilmiştir (p<0,05). Sonuç: Mobil işitme testi uygulamaları farklı mobil telefonlarda uygulandığında farklı sonuçlar verebilmektedir. Üreticiler ve araştırmacılar bu testleri tasarlarken ve değerlendirirken bu cihazla ilgili farklılıkları hesaba katmalıdır.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Mobil uygulamalar; işitme testleri; teletıp
- World Health Organization [Internet]. Hearing Loss and Role of Health Care Providers. 2024 [Access date: April 17, 2023] Available from: [Link]
- Bhutta MF, Bu X, de Muñoz PC, Garg S, Kong K. Training for hearing care providers. Bull World Health Organ. 2019;97(10):691-8. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- McPherson B. Hearing assistive technologies in developing countries: background, achievements and challenges. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014;9(5):360-4. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Mosa AS, Yoo I, Sheets L. A systematic review of healthcare applications for smartphones. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2012;12:67. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Masalski M, Kręcicki T. Self-test web-based pure-tone audiometry: validity evaluation and measurement error analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(4):e71. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Irace AL, Sharma RK, Reed NS, Golub JS. Smartphone-based applications to detect hearing loss: a review of current technology. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2021;69(2):307-16. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Mahomed-Asmail F, Swanepoel de W, Eikelboom RH, Myburgh HC, Hall J 3rd. Clinical validity of hearScreen? smartphone hearing screening for school children. Ear Hear. 2016;37(1):e11-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Abu-Ghanem S, Handzel O, Ness L, Ben-Artzi-Blima M, Fait-Ghelbendorf K, Himmelfarb M. Smartphone-based audiometric test for screening hearing loss in the elderly. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;273(2):333-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Wallace J, Kanegaonkar R. The role of smartphone applications in clinical practice: a review. J Laryngol Otol. 2020:1-8. [PubMed]
- Renda L, Selçuk ÖT, Eyigör H, Osma Ü, Yılmaz MD. Smartphone based audiometric test for confirming the level of hearing; is it useable in underserved areas? J Int Adv Otol. 2016;12(1):61-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Moses JC, Adibi S, Wickramasinghe N, Nguyen L, Angelova M, Islam SMS. Smartphone as a disease screening tool: a systematic review. Sensors (Basel). 2022;22(10):3787. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Newman CW, Weinstein BE, Jacobson GP, Hug GA. The hearing handicap inventory for adults: psychometric adequacy and audiometric correlates. Ear Hear. 1990;11(6):430-3. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Aksoy S, Aslan F, Köse A. İşitme Engeli Ölçeği-erişkin: uzun ve tarama formlarının Türkçe sürümünün geçerliğinin ve güvenirliğinin incelenmesi [Hearing Impairment Scale-adult: investigating the long and the screening forms the validity and reliability of the Turkish version]. KBB-Forum. 2020;19(2):169-81. [Link]
- Masalski M, Grysiński T, Kręcicki T. Hearing tests based on biologically calibrated mobile devices: comparison with pure-tone audiometry. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018;6(1):e10. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Lycke M, Debruyne PR, Lefebvre T, Martens E, Ketelaars L, Pottel H, et al. The use of uHear? to screen for hearing loss in older patients with cancer as part of a comprehensive geriatric assessment. Acta Clin Belg. 2018;73(2):132-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Saunders GH, Frederick MT, Silverman SC, Penman T, Gardner A, Chisolm TH, et al. Hearing screening in the community. J Am Acad Audiol. 2019;30(2):145-52. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Barczik J, Serpanos YC. Accuracy of smartphone self-hearing test applications across frequencies and earphone styles in adults. Am J Audiol. 2018;27(4):570-80. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Bright T, Pallawela D. Validated smartphone-based apps for ear and hearing assessments: a review. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2016;3(2):e13. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Szudek J, Ostevik A, Dziegielewski P, Robinson-Anagor J, Gomaa N, Hodgetts B, et al. Can Uhear me now? Validation of an iPod-based hearing loss screening test. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012;41 Suppl 1:S78-84. [PubMed]
- Khoza-Shangase K, Kassner L. Automated screening audiometry in the digital age: exploring uhear? and its use in a resource-stricken developing country. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29(1):42-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Al-Abri R, Al-Balushi M, Kolethekkat A, Bhargava D, Al-Alwi A, Al-Bahlani H, et al. The accuracy of IOS device-based uHear as a screening tool for hearing loss: a preliminary study from the middle east. Oman Med J. 2016;31(2):142-5. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Born NM, Marciano MDS, Mass SDC, Silva DPCD, Scharlach RC. Influence of the type of acoustic transducer in pure-tone audiometry. Codas. 2022;34(3):e20210019. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Masalski M, Kipiński L, Grysiński T, Kręcicki T. Hearing tests on mobile devices: evaluation of the reference sound level by means of biological calibration. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(5):e130. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
- Kim G, Han W. Sound pressure levels generated at risk volume steps of portable listening devices: types of smartphone and genres of music. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):481. [Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC]
.: Process List