scholarly journals ASSESSMENT OF CENTRAL AUDITORY PROCESSING DISORDER IN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS TREATED WITH METHYLPHENIDATE DUE TO ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 20-26
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Attention Deficit ◽  
Attention Deficit Disorder ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Central Auditory Processing ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorder

Can Central Auditory Processing Tests Resist Supramodal Influences?

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Katz ◽  
Kim L. Tillery
Keyword(s):  
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder ◽  
Attention Deficit ◽  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Team Approach ◽  
Central Auditory Processing ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Hyperactivity Disorder ◽  
The Past

For the past 10 years, Cacace and McFarland have contended that current central auditory processing tests are invalid because they cannot disassociate central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) from language, attention, and other problems. Over this period of time, they have not developed a battery of tests to compare with the current procedures, so the question cannot be resolved in a proper scientific fashion. Also, we disagree with their contention and demonstrate that an experienced audiologist, under double-blind research conditions, can reliably evaluate individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder for CAPD, whether therapeutically controlled for attention with Ritalin or taking a placebo. Further, we show how intra- and intertest comparisons, as well as a team approach, disassociate CAPD from potential contamination from supramodal factors.

The Importance of Modality Specificity in Diagnosing Central Auditory Processing Disorder

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony T. Cacace ◽  
Dennis J. McFarland
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Large Body ◽  
Critical Discussion ◽  
Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Central Auditory Processing ◽  
Central Auditory Processing Disorder ◽  
Scientific Disciplines ◽  
Modality Specificity

Purpose: This article argues for the use of modality specificity as a unifying framework by which to conceptualize and diagnose central auditory processing disorder (CAPD). The intent is to generate dialogue and critical discussion in this area of study. Method: Research in the cognitive, behavioral, and neural sciences that relates to the concept of modality specificity was reviewed and synthesized. Results: Modality specificity has a long history as an organizing construct within a diverse collection of mainstream scientific disciplines. The principle of modality specificity was contrasted with the unimodal inclusive framework, which holds that auditory tests alone are sufficient to make the CAPD diagnosis. Evidence from a large body of data demonstrated that the unimodal framework was unable to delineate modality-specific processes from more generalized dysfunction; it lacked discriminant validity and resulted in an incomplete assessment. Consequently, any hypothetical model resulting from incomplete assessments or potential therapies that are based on indeterminate diagnoses are themselves questionable, and caution should be used in their application. Conclusions: Improving specificity of diagnosis is an imperative core issue to the area of CAPD. Without specificity, the concept has little explanatory power. Because of serious flaws in concept and design, the unimodal inclusive framework should be abandoned in favor of a more valid approach that uses modality specificity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document