Evaluation of reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale
10.3760/cma.j.cn115330-20240630-00390
- VernacularTitle:言语空间听觉质量量表中文版的信度和效度评估
- Author:
Junzhi WU
1
;
Juan ZHANG
Author Information
1. 四川省医学科学院 四川省人民医院（电子科技大学附属医院）耳鼻咽喉头颈外科，成都 610072
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Sound localization;
Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale;
Reliability;
Validity;
Rasch model
- From:
Chinese Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery
2025;60(7):759-768
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To sinicize the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) and to assess its reliability and validity based on the Rasch model and Classical Test Theory (CTT).Methods:The acquisition of the Chinese version of the SSQ relies on the systematic translation of the SSQ using the Brislin model. A total of 416 patients who attended the Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, between October 2022 and October 2023 were randomly selected using the Chinese version of the SSQ, of which 400 questionnaires were valid, with 281 subjects with hearing impairment [aged 16-92 (59.4±14.4) years, 164 females and 117 males] and 119 subjects with normal hearing [aged 18-72 (39.9±13.6) years, 82 females and 37 males]. The reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the SSQ were assessed by SPSS 24.0 and Winstep 3.72.3 statistical software.Results:Rasch model analysis showed that the Chinese version of the SSQ consisted of a speech perception dimension (14 items), a spatial hearing dimension (17 items), and an auditory quality dimension (18 items), each with unidimensional properties, and the data measured by the scale could be adapted for Rasch model analysis. The Chinese version of the SSQ had reliability indices over 0.8 and separation indices over 2.0 for all three dimensions. The distribution of the difficulty of the questions in the three dimensions was relatively concentrated (the three dimensions of means was: Logit 0.00), and the participants competence was relatively broad (the respective means was: Logit 0.67, Logit-1.71, Logit 0.83). Among them, the item-total correlation coefficients (ITCC) of item 28 and 30 were below 0.7, while ITCC values for the rest were all greater than 0.7. The discriminative validity was good (t=9.604-12.268, P<0.01). Exploratory factor analysis showed that the contribution rate of the three principal components was 78.49%, and the loadings of the items on the corresponding common factors were all greater than 0.4. The three rotated common factors were basically consistent with those of the original SSQ in the three dimensions. The Chinese version of the SSQ had a high predictive value for hearing loss (AUC of 0.789, P<0.001), with a sensitivity of 61.3% and specificity of 80.1% for predicting hearing loss in case of its mean score <8.5. Conclusion:The Chinese version of the SSQ has favorable reliability and validity, which can serve as a self-assessment tool of hearing ability for people with hearing loss in China in clinical application.
