Evaluation
*
Strongly disagreeDisagreeSlightly disagreeNeitherSlightly agreeAgreeStrongly agree
The activity presented balanced, evidence-based content free of commercial bias.
The presenter(s) used an effective teaching strategy.
The presentation slides / digital materials / resources and handouts were high quality.
The content was relevant to / useful for my professional practice.
The activity contributed to my knowledge, skills, and capacity to enhance the delivery of patient care.
The overall quality of the educational activity was excellent.
*
Strongly disagreeDisagreeSlightly disagreeNeitherSlightly agreeAgreeStrongly agree
Characterize the importance of speech as a critical audio signal in the military.
Identify factors that impact Speech-in-Noise Performance.
Describe possible differences between speech-in-noise tests and how their results my compare to each other and to subjective hearing complaint scores and audiometric thresholds.
Identify performance distributions of auditory and cognitive assessments in service members.
Describe the relationships between auditory and cognitive abilities.
Describe the relationships between hearing aid benefit and auditory and cognitive abilities.
Differentiate the perceptual and physiological deficits that persist in middle-aged adults despite a normal audiogram.
Analyze how pupil-indexed listening effort and envelope following responses relate to speech-in-noise performance.
Compare cross-species evidence implicating cochlear synaptopathy in age-related listening difficulties.
List the 2 domains identified by the committee.
Describe the objective and subjective measures selected by the committee to assess understanding speech in complex listening situations.
Describe the subjective measure selected by the committee to assess hearing related psychosocial health.
Compare and contrast reliability, minimal detectable difference, and minimal clinically important difference.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*