Comments on "The Use of SCAN to Identify Children at Risk for CAPD" by Emerson et al. (1997) I was interested in the article, “Observations on the Use of SCAN to Identify Children at Risk for Central Auditory Processing Disorder” by Emerson, Crandall, Seikel, and Chermak (1997) . The article reports two experiments—one “to determine whether children with a reported history of chronic otitis media (OM) within the first ... Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor  |   April 01, 1998
Comments on "The Use of SCAN to Identify Children at Risk for CAPD" by Emerson et al. (1997)
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Robert W. Keith
    University of Cincinnati, OH
Article Information
Hearing Disorders / Language Disorders / Letters to the Editor
Letter to the Editor   |   April 01, 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, April 1998, Vol. 29, 117-118. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.2902.117
History: Received June 6, 1997 , Accepted November 20, 1997
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, April 1998, Vol. 29, 117-118. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.2902.117
History: Received June 6, 1997; Accepted November 20, 1997
I was interested in the article, “Observations on the Use of SCAN to Identify Children at Risk for Central Auditory Processing Disorder” by Emerson, Crandall, Seikel, and Chermak (1997) . The article reports two experiments—one “to determine whether children with a reported history of chronic otitis media (OM) within the first 3 years of life displayed characteristics of CAPD as illuminated by the SCAN,” and the other “to examine whether SCAN test results differ based on test environment.”
The authors found no difference in SCAN results of control and OM groups, although they were clearly differentiated using the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R). Results of the second experiment, conducted on six children, suggest that the application of SCAN norms obtained in a quiet school setting compared to a sound booth may result in marked differences in subtest scores. The authors suggest the need for additional normative data to ensure valid identification of CAPD in subjects who were assessed in the sound booth.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access