2002
DOI: 10.1097/00005537-200212000-00017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Auditory Late Cortical Response and Speech Recognition in Digisonic Cochlear Implant Users

Abstract: Some characteristics of late electrically evoked auditory potentials differ significantly among cochlear implant users depending on their speech recognition performance. However, the relationship between electrophysiological and speech recognition variables is more pronounced when early (brainstem) rather than late (cortical) evoked responses are considered.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
24
1
5

Year Published

2005
2005
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
3
24
1
5
Order By: Relevance
“…As a consequence, no correlation should be expected between latencies and amplitudes of N 1 and P 2 waveforms on the one hand, and pure-tone thresholds in implanted patients on the other. This conclusion would be in contradiction with the results of Maurer et al (2002) who observed that the latency of P 2 , when evoked by electrical stimulation, was found to be dependent on auditory performances in CIP, being shorter in ''good'' than in ''poor'' performers. Also, Groenen et al (1996a,b) demonstrated that the P 2 latency was significantly longer in a group of seven adult implantees compared to that of normal-hearing listeners, and the higher the P 2 amplitude, the better the auditory performances.…”
Section: N 1 /P 2 Complexcontrasting
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As a consequence, no correlation should be expected between latencies and amplitudes of N 1 and P 2 waveforms on the one hand, and pure-tone thresholds in implanted patients on the other. This conclusion would be in contradiction with the results of Maurer et al (2002) who observed that the latency of P 2 , when evoked by electrical stimulation, was found to be dependent on auditory performances in CIP, being shorter in ''good'' than in ''poor'' performers. Also, Groenen et al (1996a,b) demonstrated that the P 2 latency was significantly longer in a group of seven adult implantees compared to that of normal-hearing listeners, and the higher the P 2 amplitude, the better the auditory performances.…”
Section: N 1 /P 2 Complexcontrasting
confidence: 95%
“…In addition to the fact that early electrically evoked brainstem responses are correlated with auditory performance in implanted patients (Maurer et al, 2002), the use of MMN could yield a more precise and sensitive objective assessment of auditory performance for each cochlear-implant user.…”
Section: Mmn and Pitch Discriminationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The normal maturation of central auditory pathways is a condition that precedes the normal speech and language development among children. These findings are possible thanks to the neural plasticity phenomenon (3) , which allows the brain maturation required for the development of oral language (4)(5)(6) . The adequate auditory stimulation during childhood allows the cortex to go through changes and reorganizations, which will enable the development of the skill that discriminates sounds arriving to the central auditory system (7)(8)(9) .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This phenomenon of auditory maturation allows the development of auditory abilities, in other words, allows the individual not only to be capable of hearing, but also for sound stimuli heard to be detected, discriminated, recognized and understood (1,2) . In recent decades, Long Latency Auditory Evoked Potentials (LLAEP), traces generated by bioelectric activities from central auditory pathways after acoustic stimulation, have shown themselves to be a resource capable of measuring the neurophysiological modifications resultant from the maturation process (3,4) . For its being an exogenous potential, in other words, not dependent on the behavioral response of the individual, they can be a useful tool to evaluate, amongst other things, small children who have still not developed auditory and/or cognitive abilities to respond to other evaluations (5,6) .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%