2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2013.09.035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An objective auditory measure to assess speech recognition in adult cochlear implant users

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

2
19
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
2
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The source of this heterogeneity lies in the number of different factors that may influence the post-operative performance. These include onset, duration and severity of the hearing loss, differences in the survival of the peripheral neural elements, residual acoustic hearing and device-related effects such as the position of the electrodes relative to neurons, design and form of the electrodes and sound processing strategy (Kral et al, 2016;van Dijk et al, 1999;Gantz et al, 1998;Wilson et al, 1993). Furthermore, factors such as central brain processing, cross-modal reorganization (recent review e.g.…”
Section: Additional Factors Having An Influence On the CI Outcomementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The source of this heterogeneity lies in the number of different factors that may influence the post-operative performance. These include onset, duration and severity of the hearing loss, differences in the survival of the peripheral neural elements, residual acoustic hearing and device-related effects such as the position of the electrodes relative to neurons, design and form of the electrodes and sound processing strategy (Kral et al, 2016;van Dijk et al, 1999;Gantz et al, 1998;Wilson et al, 1993). Furthermore, factors such as central brain processing, cross-modal reorganization (recent review e.g.…”
Section: Additional Factors Having An Influence On the CI Outcomementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The N400, reflecting semantic memory use during language comprehension (Kutas and Federmeier, 2000), has been shown to be prolonged in adult CI users when compared with NH listeners (Hahne et al, 2012;Henkin et al, 2014), suggesting a delayed and a more effortful speech processing with the limited CI input (Finke et al, 2016a). However, it is currently unknown whether the N400 can distinguish between CI users who have good versus poor speech recognition, although such a distinctiveness has been previously shown for other auditory ERPs (Soshi et al, 2014;Turgeon et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Studies in adults show that MMN is similar in good‐performing CI users and NH listeners, but it is absent or abnormal in poor‐performing CI users (Groenen, Snik & van den Broek, ; Kraus, Micco, Koch et al ., ; Ponton et al ., ; Roman, Canévet, Marquis, Triglia & Liégeois‐Chauvel, ; Zhang, Hammer, Banks, Benson, Xiang & Fu, ). MMN amplitudes also correlate with speech perception in adults and children with CIs (Gordon, Tanaka & Papsin, ; Kileny, Boerst & Zwolan, ; Lonka, Kujala, Lehtokoski et al ., ; Lonka, Relander‐Syrjänen, Johansson, Näätänen, Alho & Kujala, ; Singh, Liasis, Rajput, Towell & Luxon, ; Turgeon, Lazzouni, Lepore & Ellemberg, ), suggesting that CI users can encode acoustic differences. Studying musical perception in adult CI users with a multi‐feature paradigm, Sandmann et al .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%