Analysis of Self-Reported and Audio-metrically Measured Hearing Loss in the Defense Force Study - Assignment Example

Critique Assignment This paper aims to critically evaluate the research study by Kirk, McGuire, Nasveld and Treloar and to identify its strengths, weaknesses, scope and also limitations of the study entitled "Comparison of Self-Reported and Audio-metrically Measured Hearing loss in the Australian Defense Force" published in 2012 by the University of Queensland centre for Military and Veterans' Health Mayne School, Brisbane Australia. Introduction The article’s introduction includes a contextual background to the hearing problems among the military men. The topic has been addressed by carefully breaking down the subject matter. It should be noted that the author has also helped in identifying a flow of the problem with the research purpose. The manner in which the topic has been discussed in the introduction makes it easier for the reader to expect the research methodology and findings. From the first instance of having a look at the title of the article, the readers can expect that the introduction will be able to create a textual as well as contextual construct. In simpler words, it can be said that the introduction of the article is clearly relevant with the objective as appointed by the author. It can also be said that the author has address some of the information tags in the introduction which may provide information which takes the reader beyond the understanding of article’s subject matter. This may be considered as irrelevant by some of the critiques but it is important to note that additional information in the introduction allows the readers to evaluate the peculiarities of the research. Thus, overall it can be said that the introduction written by the author in the article proves to be a stronger context to the research’s findings (Barton et al. 2012) Reliability of the Source The article has been published by International Journal of Audiology which is one of the most significant contributions in the field. The article was received on 15th September 2010. As per the reliability test, the acceptance of the article was done on 10 September 2011. Since the journal in publishing the content for the research purpose, it took another year for the journal to publish the article. The affiliation of the article is with International Journal of Audiology which makes it joint with British Society of Audiology and Nordic Audiological Society. The article’s publishing source, International Journal of Audiology has been a publishing source for many high-rated contributors in the field of audiology. The journal includes both original articles as well as reviews of the articles. Therefore, it could be stated that the source is reliable and appropriate. Method: Outcomes of the study are based on the quantitative research data that has been analyzed to demonstrate a comparative analysis of self-reported and audio-metrically measure of hearing loss. In this study, authors have clearly mentioned the adopted research methodology for attaining their targeted goals. It can be stated that this is an appropriate way as it affects the understanding of readers. Reference to clear methodology has been observed in many studies like Ketchener et. al (2007) and Lucino et al (2005). In both these studies, researchers have clearly mentioned that they have adopted mixed methodology including qualitative and quantitative approaches. However, by reviewing the report, it has been noticed that they have adopted quantitative method of research, but they have not mentioned it clearly in adopted methodology section. Nonetheless, the authors have mentioned that for self-reporting they derived out result based on only one question that if military men experience any problem with hearing. On the other hand, for the Audiometrical measurements three different frequencies were considered. These methods are considered most appropriate as evidenced from the American Hearing Research Foundation report and accepted approaches indicated by The Children's Hearing Institute (Children Hearing 2011). In this study, no conceptual and theoretical frameworks like other studies such as by Ketchener et. al (2007) and Lucino et al (2005) have been provided and adopted. This approach is not totally incorrect, as evidenced from other credible studies, but for a more organized and well-balanced format researchers widely include theoretical and conceptual frameworks in their studies. This allows better understanding by the readers of the basis used by the researchers for carrying out the study and also, it also helps in understanding the basis for deriving results and their standardization. For instance, there is another significant study from the University of Queensland entitled as "Outcomes for Young Children with Hearing Loss in an Auditory-Verbal Therapy Program" by Doran (2010) in which the author has clearly highlighted the conceptual framework of the study based on shortcomings of the prior researches and later in the discussion section of the report the findings from their study are compared with the results of previous researches. In this way, the readability and understandability of the findings from the current study are enhanced. Material and Methods: Moreover, it has been noticed that the study has shown targeted sample population based on location deployment. Such as, out of 3,335 respondents, 985 were those who were deployed in Bougainville, 1,027 were deployed in East Timor, 153 were those who deployed in both Bougainville and East Timor while the rest of 1,170 were deployed in different localities. The methodology adopted in this study does not take into consideration other factors for collection and summarizing the findings from the study. On the other hand, in order studies researchers usually classified their sample population based on gender and age. For instance, Hilton study shows out of total 62 fighters, 22 were civilians and 40 were on military active duty. In this study, authors have also talked out about mean age, which is an important factor while analyzing health issue because age factor plays a crucial role in determining intensity and severity of any type of health loss. Hilton witnessed that their entire group was 32 years with a range of 19 to 57 years. Civilians were between 30 to 57 years, while active duty individuals ranged between 19 to 37 years. At first, the age factor point was missed out in this study and then they have not provided logical reason to back up this weakness. However, it should be appreciated that in the study the researchers have considered sampling of those individuals, whose previous medical data was available, whereas this fact has not been noticed in Hilton research study. Along with the indication to the actual research methodology appointed by the authors in the article, there are clear evidences of the materials which have been used. This has left a mark for the aspiring researchers to study the subject matter and contribute in the field. Considering the materials for research that have been used are the medical records of the ADF personnel who have used as the participants of the research. These medical records are also referred to as CPHESs which are conducted each year examining the health condition of the officers. If I would have undertaken the similar study, I would have got a lot of help from the research materials which have been dominated yet highlighted in the research methodology. Other than the use of CPHESs, the researchers have also employed the use of forms of self-reported hearing problems measure as well as audiometric testing. Both the methods have been employed with the help of apparatus setting and form filling. All these information have been complied along with the CPHESs to sustain the findings and discussion section. The variables which have been selected for the core research are sensitivity, specificity, and determined hearing loss. With such variables, the data can easily be analyzed as to the readings with negative values proved hearing loss among the participants. Result: The result of the study has been generated with the help of frequency table and evaluating the threshold. The authors have explicitly explained the patterns of research with the help of a table including performance data in a comparison method. This approach by the authors does enhance the presentation of the report; however, it could have further assisted if explanatory information related to measures of agreement was suffixed to the table. The authors have tried to make use of both the type of criteria of reporting hearing loss. It was noted in the findings section by the authors that the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values differed greatly in the criteria of audiometric measure. It can easily be noted that the authors have found out that the variables have been indicating lower values between the audiometric criteria. Also, all types of hearing frequency have proven that the self-report is less effective. The authors have also employed the method of conducting analysis in terms of age sex rank and service which helps the readers to understand the context of military people and hearing problems. This takes a more qualitative context to the research making it much understandable even for the general audiences. For this purpose, the authors have made use a table referring to different abrasion to the hearing loss. The authors have also allowed the audience to note that the value or measure of hearing threshold is 25 dB HL. The results have also proven that the issue of hearing loss is higher among military men than those of military women. This is a remarkable result which gives a base to the further research that can be conducted in the respective field of interest. Discussion: The discussion is provided by the authors, which is based on the results achieved from the study. It highlights weaknesses related to self-report measures of hearing in occupational groups which in this case has been the Australian Defence Force. The discussion also provides the limitations associated with the standardization of audiometric measurement methods as the study did not involve any analysis of the variations on the basis of differences in testing location and audiology staff. This could be considered as the lacking of the study and thereafter the discussion of results. Another area of concern that has been highlighted in this part of the report is the possible under-reporting of hearing loss by individuals included in the sample which could affect the use of audiometric testing. The discussion part does attempt to link up the results from the study to already existing literature and results from the previous studies but does not provide a detailed discussion over the extent of comparability with them or in other terms it does not identify the similarities and differences that could arise as a result of the difference between the approach used by these studies. This section of the report therefore summarizes the results from the study to move on the conclusion chapter that is discussed in the following heading. Conclusion: Moreover, in the concluding section of the study, outcomes were presented in a table form with a range of different frequencies including binaural low frequency, better-era mid frequency, binaural mid-frequency, worse era mid-frequency, binaural high frequency and worse-ear high frequency. Statistical analysis of these frequencies with sample population was difficult to understand because in this study authors have not mentioned the results with respect to the manner they distributed sampling population. However, similar types of results are easily understandable in Hilton research article. Although, this study and Hilton article clearly reflect hear loss problem varies and increases with age factor, employment period and gender, but Hilton research finding are easy to understand because the author has explicitly calculated each outcome with binary logistic regression with separate numerical presentation of variables, odds ratio, confidence interval and p-value. Additionally, in the end it was clearly observed that no recommendations have been provided by professionals to assist needs and problems of Arm force individuals suffering from hear loss issues (American-Hearing 2012). Therefore, from the above critical analysis it can be observed that the way entire research study was searched, formatted and complied was commendable and adopted approaches can be witnessed from other studies as well. But, the result and discussion and most importantly a shortcoming in coverage of significant aspects was noticeable in comparison with other previous related studies. Overall analysis of the article that has been conducted in the paper has been a very fruitful experience in terms of understanding the research purpose and the contribution of the authors in the field. Overall flow of the article has explained every aspect of the subject matter in an analytical manner allowing me to evaluate the subject matter. List of References American-Hearing, 2012. Noise Induced Hearing Loss. [Online] Available at: http://american-hearing.org/disorders/noise-induced-hearing-loss/ [Accessed 15 November 2012]. Barton, C. et al., 2012. Smoking prevalence, its determinants and short-term health implications in the Australian Defence Force. Centre for Military and Veterans' Health, 175(4), pp. 267-72.. Bleier, J., McFarlane, A. & McGuire, A., 2011. Risk of adverse health outcomes associated with frequency and duration of deployment with the Australian Defense Force.. Queensland Institute of Medical Research, pp. 139-46. Childrens Hearing, 2011. About Us. [Online] Available at: http://childrenshearing.org/custom/about_us.html [Accessed 15 November 2012]. Doa, T., Fischa, C. & Evoya, F., 2004. Susac Syndrome: Report of Four Cases and Review of the Literature. Academic Journal of Neuroradiology, Issue 25, pp. 382-388. Dornan, D., 2010. Outcomes for Young Children with Hearing Loss in an Auditory-Verbal Therapy Program, Queensland: The University of Queensland. Eckels, P., 2009. Investigation and literature review of unilateral hearing loss, Washington: Washington University School of Medicine. Evans, D. M., Kirk, K. M., Nyholt, D. R. & Carti, N. G., 2005. Teenage acne is influenced by genetic factors. British Journal of Dermatology, 152(3), pp. 579-581. Hilton, A., 2002. Occupationally Acquired Hearing Loss Among Civilian and Active Duty Fire Fighter, Texas: The University of Texas. Kirk, K., McGuire, A., Nasveld, P. & Treloar, S., 2012. Comparison of self-reported and audiometrically-measured hearing loss in the Australian Defence Force. International Journal of Audiology, 51(4), p. 294–298. Kitchener, S., Nasveld, P. & Edstein, M., 2007. Short Report: Tafenoquine for the Treatment of Recurrent Plasmodium Vivax Malaria. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg, 76(3), p. 494–496. Luciano, M., Kirk, K., Heath, A. & Martin, N., 2005. The genetics of tea and coffee drinking and preference for source of caffeine in a large community sample of Australian twins. Addiction, 100(10), pp. 1510-7. Thorne, P., 2006. Noise Induced Hearing Loss, s.l.: Auckland Uniservice Limited. Waller, M., Treloar, S. & Sim, M., 2012. Traumatic events, other operational stressors and physical and mental health reported by Australian Defence Force personnel following peacekeeping and war-like deployments, s.l.: Waller et al. BMC Psychiatry. Read More