Na Han

The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Are you Na Han?

Claim your profile

Publications (6)4.6 Total impact

  • International journal of audiology 07/2008; 47(6):393-5. · 1.34 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To confirm alternative methods for Mandarin hearing in noise test (MHINT) to get the performance-intensity (PI) function, and to set up right test rules for scoring sentence intelligibility for subjects. Sentence speech reception thresholds were obtained for 30 normally hearing subjects with the MHINT test using several adaptive rules based on either character or word segmentation of the sentences. Each adaptive rule was intended to measure the threshold at a different point on the PI function. By also measuring sentence intelligibility at each threshold, the accuracy with which the PI function was estimated could be evaluated for each type of segmentation. The results of different segmentation were compared. There was no significant difference in the reception threshold of sentences (RTS) between the group which used character segmentation and the group which used word segmentation (P > 0.05); and also no significant difference in their speech recognition score (SRS, P > 0.05). When the same subject used both character segmentation and word segmentation to do the test, there was no significant difference in their RTS between character segmentation and word segmentation (P > 0.05); and also no significant difference in their SRS (P > 0.05). This method could be used not only with normally hearing individuals and people with hearing loss to evaluate their sentence intelligibility, but also with people who had aided equipment.
    Zhonghua er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Chinese journal of otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery 05/2007; 42(4):241-4.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To develop two versions of the Mandarin Hearing In Noise Test (MHINT). These tests are adaptive tests that measure the reception threshold for sentences (RTSs) in quiet and in noise. The RTS is the presentation level at which half the sentences are correctly recognized. Four studies were undertaken to (1) develop sentence materials, (2) equalize sentence difficulty, (3) create phonemically balanced sentence lists; and (4) evaluate within-list response variability, inter-list reliability, and produce normative data. A total of 137 native Mandarin (Putonghua) speaking subjects in Mainland China and 89 native Mandarin speakers in Taiwan participated. They had normal hearing thresholds at 25 dB HL or better. RTSs were measured under four headphone test conditions: Quiet, and in noise with noise originating from the 0 degree (Noise Front), 90 degrees to the right (Noise Right), and 90 degrees to the left (Noise Left). The speech originated from the front (0 degree) in all conditions. The noise level was fixed at 65 dBA, and the speech was varied adaptively to find the RTS. Two versions of the test materials, consisting of 24, 20-sentence lists each in Mandarin spoken in the Mainland (the MHINT-M) and the dialect of Mandarin spoken in Taiwan (the MHINT-T), were created from two sets of 240 sentences containing 10 syllables per sentence. The mean Quiet RTS was 14.7 dBA, using the MHINT-M, and 19.4 dBA, using the MHINT-T. Using the MHINT-M, the mean RTS for Noise Front was -4.3 dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), -11.7 dB SNR for Noise Right, and -11.7 dB SNR for Noise Left. Using the MHINT-T, the Noise Front RTS was -4.0 dB SNR, -10.7 dB SNR for Noise Right, and -11.0 dB SNR for Noise Left. Results in noise are slightly better than those seen for the English HINT norms. Response variability within list was low, and inter-list reliability was high, indicating that consistent results can be obtained using any list. Confidence intervals are reported. The two versions of the MHINT are the first standardized Mandarin sentence speech intelligibility tests. Similar to other language versions of the HINT, the MHINT was developed using the same rationale as the English HINT, allowing norm-referenced results for the MHINT to be compared directly with results in other languages. The MHINT would benefit from further evaluation of its validity.
    Ear and Hearing 05/2007; 28(2 Suppl):70S-74S. · 3.26 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To test non-mandarin native-speaker of normal hearing with MHINT. Eighty-two non-native Mandarin speakers with normal hearing were included. The test were done under four test conditions by HINT for Windows V6.1. The results were compared between non-mandarin native-speakers' with mandarin native-speakers'. The results were analyzed statistically. Three hundred and twenty-eight results of the subjects were gained. There was evident significantly difference between mandarin and non-mandarin native speakers (P < 0.01), and between non-mandarin native speakers with high educational level and low educational level ( P < 0.01), but there was no difference when compared with their age, time of use Mandarin in the results (P > 0.05). Non-mandarin native-speakers' results are lower than mandarin native-speakers'. The primary factor affect MHINT results are native language and educational experiences.
    Lin chuang er bi yan hou ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology 12/2006; 20(23):1079-81, 1084.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To analyze the auditory capability of preschool children before and after cochlear implantation using meaningful auditory integration scale (MAIS) questionnaire. Eighty-two prelingually deaf patients participated in this study. They received a cochlear implant at the age of 3 to 6 years and 11 months. The audiologists who were trained for the research used the MAIS questionnaire. Audiologists asked for the parents' answers and recorded all the information about the device using (Q1,2) and the patient's spontaneous auditory behavioural responses including spontaneous alerting to sound Q3 approximately 6 and deriving meaning from sound (Q7 approximately 10). The evaluation was performed before operation and 1 , 3, 6 months, 1, 1.5, 2 years after switch-on. The scores of question 1a and 1b were not significantly different among the different periods after switch-on. The scores of question 2 to 10 were significantly different among the different periods after switch-on. Considerable variability across subjects' auditory ability after cochlear implantation was noted. Most of the patients showed no consistent response to sound in everyday life before implantation. After cochlear implantation, a significant increase in auditory capability occurred. The children demonstrated faster development of device using relative to spontaneous alerting to sound and deriving meaning from sound.
    Zhonghua er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Chinese journal of otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery 03/2006; 41(2):112-5.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to analyze the auditory capability of infants before and after cochlear implantation by using IT-MAIS questionnaire. Eighty-six prelingually deaf patients participated in this study. They received a cochlear implant at the age of 1 to 3 yr. The audiologists who were trained for the research used the IT-MAIS questionnaire. Audiologists asked for the parents' answers face to face and recorded all the information about the patient's spontaneous auditory behavioural responses including vocalization, behaviour, spontaneous alerting to sound and deriving meaning from sound. The evaluation was performed before operation and 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year after switch-on. The scores of question 1 were significantly different between pre-operation and 1, 3, 6, 12 months after switch-on (P = 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000). The scores of question 2 were significantly different between pre-operation and 6, 12 months after switch-on (P = 0.000, 0.000). The scores of question 3 were significantly different between pre-operation and 3, 6, 12 months after switch-on (P = 0.001, 0.000, 0.000). The scores of question 4 were significantly different between pre-operation and 3, 6, 12 months after switch-on (P = 0.002, 0.000, 0.000). The scores of question 5 were significantly different between pre-operation and 1, 3, 6, 12 months after switch-on (P = 0.046, 0.00, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000). The scores of question 6 were significantly different between pre-operation and 3, 6, 12 months after switch-on (P = 0.037, 0.000, 0.000). The scores of question 7 were significantly different between pre-operation and 3, 6, 12 months after switch-on ( P = 0.000, 0.000, 0.000). The scores of question 8 were significantly different between pre-operation and 6, 12 months after switch-on (P = 0.001, 0.001). The scores of question 9 were significantly different between pre-operation and 3, 6, 12 months after switch-on ( P = 0.023, 0.000, 0.000). The scores of question 10 were significantly different between pre-operation and 12 months after switch-on (P = 0.048). Most of the patients showed no consistent response to sound in everyday life before implantation. After cochlear implantation, a significant increase in auditory capability occurred. The children demonstrated faster development of vocalization behaviour and spontaneous alerting to sound than deriving meaning from sound.
    Lin chuang er bi yan hou ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology 06/2005; 19(10):442-5.