This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

JOSEPH SATALOFF, MD; LAWRENCE VASSALLO, MS

Arch Otolaryngol. 1966;84(5):587-592.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

IN THE 1965 progress report on medical audiology we reviewed an article by Burke et al,¹ "Variability of Threshold Shift in SAL Technique." They reported great variability in the shift of pure tone thresholds of patients with normal hearing when premeasured white noise was applied to the forehead. They felt that this variability precluded the use of sensorineural acuity level (SAL) technique as a replacement for conventional bone-conduction testing. Jerger and Jerger² challenged this logic by pointing out that

... the norms for... conventional air-conduction and bone-conduction audiometry are derived from data with a very similar "variability".. If one concludes that this variability is sufficient to preclude the use of SAL for precise diagnostic audiometry, then clearly one must reject conventional air-conduction and bone-conduction audiometry on the same grounds.

Rudmose, according to a letter, Dec 15, 1965, argued the same point and also pointed out that the SAL technique . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
PHILADELPHIA

Footnotes
Submitted for publication June 13, 1966.

Reprint requests to 1721 Pine St, Philadelphia 19103.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?