Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Apr 15.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Acad Audiol. 2020 Apr 15;31(4):292–301. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.19047

Table 3.

Bivariate Correlations among QOL Measures from the NCIQ and Speech and Environmental Sound Outcome Measures for CI Participants

r Values Word Recognition
(Percent Correct)
Standard Sentence Recognition (Percent Correct Words) AzBio Sentence Recognition (Percent Correct Words) High-Variability Sentence Recognition (Percent Correct Words) Audiovisual Sentence Recognition (Percent Correct Words) Environmental Sound Recognition (Percent Correct)
NCIQ (sum score) 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.41* 0.31
 Physical—basic sound perception 0.08 0.07 0.34 0.04 0.15 0.15
 Physical—advanced sound perception 0.43** 0.36* 0.48* 0.37* 0.36* 0.40*
 Physical—speech production 0.36* 0.35* 0.49* 0.27 0.38* 0.56**
  Physical (sum score) 0.35* 0.30 0.50* 0.27 0.35* 0.44**
  Psychological—self-esteem (sum score) 0.16 0.19 0.08 0.17 0.39* 0.26
 Social—activity limitations 0.02 0.10 0.07 0.17 0.26 0.15
 Social—social interactions 0.10 0.14 0.07 0.19 0.44** 0.17
  Social (sum score) 0.06 0.12 0.07 0.18 0.36* 0.16

Note: Bold values have a significant p value after Holm–Bonferroni correction.

*

p < 0.05;

**

p < 0.01