Chapter 3 84 sounds when trying to listen to something?’) was not included in our questionnaire. Therefore, the average score of the quality of hearing scale and the average of all questions was calculated without considering the answer on this question. Statistical analysis Patients’ baseline characteristics (Table 1) were described using descriptive statistics, as well as the components of aural rehabilitation that were provided (Table 3). We used histograms to check if the assumption of normality was fulfilled for the outcomes NFR, LE, personal adjustments, communication strategies, binaural hearing impairment, auditory work demands, and self-reported hearing ability. In order to verify whether the patients of the Amsterdam UMC could be analyzed togetherwiththepatientsofLibraRevalidationandAudiology, t-testswereperformed to evaluate group differences. No differences were found in the demographic and clinical characteristics between the patients who visited the Amsterdam UMC and the patients who visited Libra Revalidation and Audiology. Therefore, the results of all patients were described and analyzed together. To assess the first research question, correlation coefficients were calculated between NFR/LE and the factors of themodel. We calculated the correlation coefficients in the same way as in our previous study (Van der Hoek-Snieders et al. 2020). The Pearson correlation coefficients were used to calculate the correlation between two continuous variables and Bi-serial correlation coefficients (Kraemer, 2014) were used to calculate the correlation between a continuous and a dichotomous variable. The interpretation of the correlation coefficients was weak (<0.3 or >-0.3), moderate (between 0.3 and 0.7 or between -0.3 and -0.7), or strong (>0.7 or <-0.7) (Ratner, 2009). According to Spence and Stanley (2016), we calculated 95% prediction intervals around the correlations found in the previous study. This calculation was based on a replication sample size of 60, which corresponds to the sample size of our study. To achieve the second research objective, the smallest detectable change in the NFR was calculated for our study sample size according to (Hoofs et al., 2017), and it was evaluated whether the effect size exceeded this value. Also, the differences between scores over time were calculated for the variables NFR, LE, personal adjustments, communication strategies, auditory work demands, and self-reported hearing ability. Paired t-tests were used to evaluate differences between T0 and T1. Change scores were
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw