Communication outcomes of children with hearing loss enrolled in programs implementing different educational approaches: A systematic review

Erbasi, Ennur; Hickson, Louise; Scarinci, Nerina

doi:10.1080/2050571x.2016.1238611

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, these families receive more frequent reminders of the benefit of HT use when interacting with a therapist and may indicate more engaged families. This unique finding supports the call for more sensitive and specific measurement tools of parental involvement and insight into pediatric aural re/habilitation (Erbasi et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

“…Regular caregiver intervention attendance also predicted increased HT use. While the positive impact of caregiver participation in aural re/habilitation on the language development of children with hearing loss is well known (Erbasi et al, 2017;Flexer & Wolfe, 2020), less is known about how caregiver adherence to intervention appointments could influence auditory-based outcomes. Although both attendance and caregiver participation in intervention were identified through bivariate analysis in this study, only regular attendance was included in the GLM.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predictors of hearing technology use in children

Booysen

Roux

Masenge

et al. 2021

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To identify and describe predictors of daily hearing technology (HT) use in children. DesignRetrospective review of clinical records. Multiple regression analyses were performed to identify predictors. Study sampleThe sample included 505 children (<11 years of age) using hearing aids (HAs), cochlear implants (CIs), and bone conduction hearing devices (BCHDs). ResultsAverage HT use was 9.4 h a day. Bivariate analyses yielded 31 potential predictors from the 42 variables included. The general linear model (p < 0.01, R 2 = 0.605) identified 10 interacting factors that significantly associated with increased HT use. Intrinsic predictors of increased HT use included older chronological age, more severe degrees of hearing loss and older ages at diagnosis and initial HA fitting. Extrinsic predictors included the child's ability to independently use HT, at least one CI as part of the HT fitting, coordinated onsite audiological management, self-procured batteries, auditory-oral communication mode and regular caregiver intervention attendance. ConclusionsAverage HT use was high, approximating hearing hours of peers with normal hearing. CI recipients demonstrated higher HT use compared to children using other HT. The newly identified factors can predict and increase HT use in children while contributing to evidence-based intervention services that promote optimal auditory-based outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of hearing technology use in children

Booysen

Roux

Masenge

et al. 2021

International Journal of Audiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There has been no shortage of attempts to identify what kinds of early experiences with linguistic input are most likely to yield subsequent language mastery (for recent reviews, see Belzner and Seal, 2009;Fitzpatrick et al, 2016;Erbasi et al, 2017;Demers and Bergeron, 2019). However, these efforts have largely failed to yield consensus, for several reasons.…”

Section: Language Input Matters At a Population Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Input Matters: Assessing Cumulative Language Access in Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals and Populations

Hall

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children present several challenges to traditional methods of language assessment, and yet language assessment for this population is absolutely essential for optimizing their developmental potential. Whereas assessment often focuses on language outcomes, this Conceptual Analysis argues that assessing cumulative language input is critically important both in clinical work with DHH individuals and in research/public health contexts concerned with DHH populations. At the individual level, paying attention to the input (and the person's access to it) is vital for discriminating disorder from delay, and for setting goals and strategies for reaching them. At the population level, understanding relationships between cumulative language input and resulting language outcomes is essential to the broader public health efforts aimed at identifying strategies to improve outcomes in DHH populations and to theoretical efforts to understand the role that language plays in child development. Unfortunately, several factors jointly result in DHH children's input being under-described at both individual and population levels: for example, overly simplistic ways of classifying input, and the lack of tools for assessing input more thoroughly. To address these limitations, this Conceptual Analysis proposes a new way of characterizing a DHH child's cumulative experience with input, and outlines the features that a tool would need to have in order to measure this alternative construct.

show abstract

“…Second, at the same time DHH children as a population are still significantly underperforming on standardized assessments of speech and spoken language, even after early identification, early amplification, and early enrollment in intervention and support services (Ching et al, 2013; Erbasi, Hickson, & Scarinci, 2017; Geers, Nicholas, Tobey, & Davidson, 2016; Muse et al, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Deaf children need language, not (just) speech

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH) children need to master at least one language (spoken or signed) to reach their full potential. Providing access to a natural sign language supports this goal. Despite evidence that natural sign languages are beneficial to DHH children, many researchers and practitioners advise families to focus exclusively on spoken language. We critique the Pediatrics article ‘Early Sign Language Exposure and Cochlear Implants’ (Geers et al., 2017) as an example of research that makes unsupported claims against the inclusion of natural sign languages. We refute claims that (1) there are harmful effects of sign language and (2) that listening and spoken language are necessary for optimal development of deaf children. While practical challenges remain (and are discussed) for providing a sign language-rich environment, research evidence suggests that such challenges are worth tackling in light of natural sign languages providing a host of benefits for DHH children – especially in the prevention and reduction of language deprivation.

show abstract

Communication outcomes of children with hearing loss enrolled in programs implementing different educational approaches: A systematic review

Cited by 12 publications

References 64 publications

Predictors of hearing technology use in children

Predictors of hearing technology use in children

The Input Matters: Assessing Cumulative Language Access in Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals and Populations

Deaf children need language, not (just) speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About