Current Issue
Online First
Volumes and Issues
For Authors
Manuscript Guidelines
Review Process
Conflict of Interest
Copyright
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Aim and Scope
Policy and Ethical Guidelines
Promotion of the Journal
Print-Version Subscription
Publisher and Contact Information
Contact Information
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
NEPALI VERSIONS OF FISHER’S AUDITORY PROBLEMS CHECKLIST AND THE CHILDREN’S AUDITORY PERFORMANCE CHECKLIST
1
Pokhara Academy of Health Sciences, Nepal
2
Amplifon, Australia
3
Lumbini Provincial Hospital, Nepal
A - Research concept and design; B - Collection and/or assembly of data; C - Data analysis and interpretation; D - Writing the article; E - Critical revision of the article; F - Final approval of article;
Submission date: 2025-05-12
Final revision date: 2026-02-25
Acceptance date: 2026-03-02
Online publication date: 2026-05-29
Publication date: 2026-05-29
Corresponding author
J Hear Sci 2026;16(1):9-15
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Central Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD) involves deficits in the processing of auditory information within the central nervous system. Children with CAPD remain undiagnosed in Nepal due to a lack of assessment tools. Developing a screening tool for CAPD in the Nepali language is needed to identify at-risk children.
Material and methods:
Fisher’s Auditory Problems Checklist (FAPC) and the Children’s Auditory Performance Checklist (CHAPS) were translated into Nepali using the translation/back-translation method. The questionnaires were administered to 100 students in the Kathmandu valley using cluster sampling. Internal consistency and test–retest reliability analysis were undertaken, and validity was measured in terms of face validity.
Results:
Cronbach’s alpha was 0.761 for FAPC and 0.949 for CHAPS. All questions received a rating of > 4 from 5 audiologists, confirming their adequacy in terms of content, clarity, and intended purpose. Pearson’s r-value of 0.998 for CHAPS and 0.775 for FAPC was obtained in test–retest reliability analysis.
Conclusions:
The Nepali versions of Fisher’s checklist and CHAPS demonstrated good internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and face validity, supporting their use as preliminary CAPD screening tools.
Central Auditory Processing Disorder (CAPD) involves deficits in the processing of auditory information within the central nervous system. Children with CAPD remain undiagnosed in Nepal due to a lack of assessment tools. Developing a screening tool for CAPD in the Nepali language is needed to identify at-risk children.
Material and methods:
Fisher’s Auditory Problems Checklist (FAPC) and the Children’s Auditory Performance Checklist (CHAPS) were translated into Nepali using the translation/back-translation method. The questionnaires were administered to 100 students in the Kathmandu valley using cluster sampling. Internal consistency and test–retest reliability analysis were undertaken, and validity was measured in terms of face validity.
Results:
Cronbach’s alpha was 0.761 for FAPC and 0.949 for CHAPS. All questions received a rating of > 4 from 5 audiologists, confirming their adequacy in terms of content, clarity, and intended purpose. Pearson’s r-value of 0.998 for CHAPS and 0.775 for FAPC was obtained in test–retest reliability analysis.
Conclusions:
The Nepali versions of Fisher’s checklist and CHAPS demonstrated good internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and face validity, supporting their use as preliminary CAPD screening tools.
FUNDING
This research and article did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
REFERENCES (43)
1.
Shakiba S, Rouhbakhsh N, Mohammadkhani Q, Abdollahi FZ, Zadeh EF. Translation, validity, and reliability of the Persian version of the Fisher Auditory Problems Checklist. J Mod Rehabil, 2018; 12(3): 169–80. https://doi.org/10.32598/JMR.V....
2.
Bellis TJ. Assessment and management of central auditory processing disorders in the educational setting: from science to practice. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2011.
3.
Weihing J, Chermak GD, Musiek FE. Auditory training for central auditory processing disorder. Semin Hear, 2015; 36(4): 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035...
4.
Young M, Protti-Patterson E. Management perspectives of central auditory problems in children: top-down and bottom-up considerations. Semin Hear, 1984; 5(3): 251–9. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0028....
5.
Cherry RS, Kruger B. Selective auditory attention abilities of learning disabled and normal achieving children. J Learn Disabil, 1983; 16(4): 202–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221....
6.
Barr DF. Auditory Perceptual Disorders: An introduction. Springfield, Ill: Charles C. Thomas; 1972.
7.
Merifield DO, Hall CM, Merrell HB. Auditory imperception. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol, 1976; 85(2): 255–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/000348....
8.
Sanger DD, Freed JM, Decker TN. Behavioral profile of preschool children suspected of auditory language processing problems. Hear J, 1985; 10: 17–20.
9.
Wilson WJ, Arnott W. Using different criteria to diagnose (central) auditory processing disorder: how big a difference does it make? J Speech Lang Hear Res, 2013; 56(1): 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4...).
10.
Barry JG, Tomlin D, Moore DR, Dillon H. Use of questionnaire--based measures in the assessment of listening difficulties in school-aged children. Ear Hear, 2015; 36(6): e300–13.
11.
Nagao K, Riegner T, Padilla J, Greenwood LA, Loson J, Zavala S, et al. Prevalence of auditory processing disorder in school-aged children in the Mid-Atlantic region. J Am Acad Audiol, 2016; 27(9): 691–700. https://doi.org/10.3766/jaaa.1....
12.
Schow RL, Whitaker MM, Seikel JA, Brockett JE, Domitz Vieira DM. Validity of the Multiple Auditory Processing Assessment–2: a test of auditory processing disorder. LSHSS, 2020; 51(4): 993–1006. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_L....
13.
Keith WJ, Purdy SC, Baily MR, Kay FM. New Zealand guidelines on auditory processing disorder, 2019. New Zealand Audiological Society, https://www.audiology.org.nz/ [Accessed: 13.10.2025].
14.
Muthu Selvi T, Yathiraj A. Prediction of auditory processing difficulties from the Screening Checklist for Auditory Processing (SCAP). In: 42nd National Conference of the Indian Speech and Hearing Association, 2010, Bengalooru, India.
15.
Chermak GD, Musiek FE. Central auditory processing disorders: new perspectives. San Diego, London: Singular Publishing Group; 1997.
16.
Chermak GD, Musiek FE. Neurological substrate of central auditory processing disorder. In: Handbook of Central Auditory Processing Disorder: Auditory neuroscience and diagnosis. Musiek FE, Chermak GD, Editors. San Diego: Plural Publishing; 2014, 89–111.
17.
Musiek FE, Baran JA, Bellis TJ, Chermak GD, Hall JW, Keith RW, et al. Guidelines for the Diagnosis, Treatment and Management of Children and Adults with Central Auditory Processing Disorder. American Academy of Audiology. Reston; 2010, 1–51.
18.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (Central) Auditory Processing Disorder: The role of the audiologist, 2005. http://www.asha.org/policy/tr2... [Accessed: 29.10.2025].
19.
Catts HW, Chermak GD, Craig CH, Johnston JR, Keith RW, Musiek FE, et al. Central auditory processing: current status of research and implications for clinical practice task force on central auditory processing consensus development. Am J Audiol, 1996; 5(2): 41–52.
20.
Schow RL, Seikel JA, Chermak GD, Berent M. Central auditory processes and test measures: ASHA 1996 Revisited. Am J Audiol, 2000; 9(2): 63–8. https://doi.org/10.1044/1059-0...).
21.
Smoski WJ, Brunt MA, Tannahill JC. Listening characteristics of children with central auditory processing disorders. LSHSS, 1992; 23(2): 145–52. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1....
22.
Smoski W, Brunt MA, Tannahill JC. Children’s Auditory Performance Scale (CHAPS). Tampa, FL: Educational Audiology Association, 1998: 1–10.
23.
Fisher L. Fisher’s Auditory Problems Checklist. Bemidji, MN: Life Products, 1976.
24.
O’Hara B. The Auditory Processing Domains Questionnaire (APDQ 2012, rev. 1): For parents and teachers of students ages 7–17 years, 2006.
25.
Emanuel DC, Ficca KN, Korczak P. Survey of the diagnosis and management of auditory processing disorder. Am J Audiol, 2011; 20(1): 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1044/1059-0...).
26.
Volpatto FL, Rechia IC, Lessa AH, Soldera CLC, Ferreira MID, Machado MS. Questionnaires and checklists for central auditory processing screening used in Brazil: a systematic review. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol, 2019; 85(1): 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjor....
27.
Garbaruk ES, Goykhburg MV, Warzybok A, Tavartkiladze GA, Pavlov PV, Kollmeier B. The application of the screening questionnaires for the diagnostics of the central auditory processing disorders in the pediatric practice. Vestn Otorinolaringol, 2018; 83(4): 43. https://doi.org/10.17116/otori....
28.
DeBonis DA. AAA (2010) CAPD clinical practice guidelines: need for an update. Int J Audiol, 2017; 56(9): 657–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/149920....
30.
Chermak GD, Bamiou DE, Iliadou V, Musiek FE. Practical guidelines to minimise language and cognitive confounds in the diagnosis of CAPD: a brief tutorial. Int J Audiol, 2017; 56(7): 499–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/149920....
31.
Hambleton RK. The next generation of the ITC test translation and adaptation guidelines. Eur J Psychol Assess, 2001; 17(3): 164. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5....
32.
Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol, 1993; 46(12): 1417–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4....
33.
Eremenco SL, Cella D, Arnold BJ. A comprehensive method for the translation and cross-cultural validation of health status questionnaires. Eval Health Prof, 2005; 28(2): 212–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/016327....
34.
Bradley C. Translation of questionnaires for use in different languages and cultures. In: Handbook of Psychology and Diabetes. Routledge; 2013, 43–55.
35.
Heinisch O. Cochran, W. G.: Sampling Techniques, 2. Aufl. John Wiley and Sons, New York, London 1963. Preis s. Biom J, 1965; 7(3): 203. https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.1....
36.
Chermak GD, Bellis TJ, Musiek FE. Neurobiology, cognitive science, and intervention. In: Handbook of Central Auditory Processing Disorder: Comprehensive intervention, 2nd ed. Chermak GD, Musiek FE, Editors. San Diego: Plural Publishing Inc.; 2014, 3–38.
37.
Strange AK, Zalewski TR, Waibel-Duncan MK. Exploring the usefulness of Fisher’s Auditory Problems Checklist as a screening tool in relationship to the Buffalo Model Diagnostic Central Auditory Processing Test Battery. J Edu Audiol, 2009; 15: 44–52.
38.
Baydan M, Aslan F, Yılmaz S, Yalçınkaya F. Children’s Auditory Performance Scale: Turkish validity and reliability. Hacettepe University Faculty of Health Sciences Journal, 2020; 7(1): 32–40. https://doi.org/10.21020/husbf....
39.
Bieńkowska K, Gos E, Skarzynski PH. Psychometric properties of the Polish version of the Children’s Auditory Performance Scale. Med Og Nauki Zdr, 2020; 26(3): 261–7.
40.
Ghuzlan G, Mohsen SM. Validity and reliability of the Arabic version of Children’s Auditory Performance Scale. Aud Vestib Res, 2022; 31(3): 158–64. https://doi.org/10.18502/avr.v....
41.
Tsimpida D, Rajasingam S, Panagioti M, Henshaw H. The leaky pipeline of hearing care: primary to secondary care evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). Int J Audiol, 2024; 63(5): 349–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/149920....
42.
Iliadou V, Kiese-Himmel C. Common misconceptions regarding pediatric auditory processing disorder. Front Neurol, 2018; 8: 732. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.....
43.
Schnohr C, Jensen JS, Skovsen CF, Homøe P, Niclasen B, Jensen RG. Measurement of hearing impairment among Greenlandic school-children: association between self-reported data and clinical examinations. BMC Pediatr, 2022; 22(1): 618. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887....
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
