Social conversational skills development in early implanted children

Guerzoni, Letizia; Murri, Alessandra; Fabrizi, Enrico; Nicastri, Maria; Mancini, Patrizia; Cuda, Domenico

doi:10.1002/lary.25809

Cited by 27 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In comparison, children without HL used complex language for 100% of the items by the time they were 6 years old. In contrast to that, results from Guerzoni et al (2016) suggest that already toddlers with a CI have pragmatic language skills comparable to hearing toddlers. Guerzoni et al (2016) used a questionnaire using two scales, one for assertiveness and one for responsiveness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…In contrast to that, results from Guerzoni et al (2016) suggest that already toddlers with a CI have pragmatic language skills comparable to hearing toddlers. Guerzoni et al (2016) used a questionnaire using two scales, one for assertiveness and one for responsiveness. The assertiveness scale included items covering the ability to ask questions, make requests, and make suggestions, while the responsiveness scale covered the ability to respond to questions and requests, and turn taking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…However, in contrast to the study by Goberis et al (2012) parents only rated how often a certain behavior occurred. As the children in the study by Guerzoni et al (2016) were only around 2 years of age it might be that differences between the groups were not apparent because they are only observed for more complex skills and more complex conversations, which a toddler might not yet have. Overall it seems like children with CI have problems with some but not all domains of pragmatic language ability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pragmatic Language Skills: A Comparison of Children With Cochlear Implants and Children Without Hearing Loss

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pragmatic language ability refers to the ability to use language in a social context. It has been found to be correlated with success in general education for deaf and hard of hearing children. It is therefore of great importance to study why deaf and hard of hearing children often perform more poorly than their hearing peers on tests measuring pragmatic language ability. In the current study the Pragmatics Profile questionnaire from the CELF-IV battery was used to measure pragmatic language ability in children using cochlear implants (N = 14) and children without a hearing loss (N = 34). No significant difference was found between the children with cochlear implants (CI) and the children without hearing loss (HL) for the sum score of the pragmatics language measure. However, 35.71% of the children with CI performed below age norm, while only 5.89% of the children without HL performed below age norm. In addition, when dividing the sum score into three sub-measures: Rituals and Conversational skills (RCS), Asking for, Giving, and Responding to Information (AGRI), and Nonverbal Communication skills (NCS), significant differences between the groups were found for the NCS measure and a tendency for a difference was found for the RCS measure. In addition, all three sub-measures (NCS, AGRI, RCS) were correlated to verbal fluency in the children with CI, but not the children without HL.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pragmatic Language Skills: A Comparison of Children With Cochlear Implants and Children Without Hearing Loss

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2004) suggested that aurally based educational programs (rehabilitation training) before and after cochlear implantation could potentially improve post-implantation audiological performance by reducing the cortical colonization phenomenon. Some scholars ( Gerard et al., 2010 , Guerzoni et al., 2016 ) found that children with better preoperative residual hearing exhibited better communication ability. However, the extent of the influence on postoperative outcomes by residual hearing and rehabilitation before implantation, as well as the mechanisms of the influence, is not clear.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cochlear implantation outcomes in children with common cavity deformity; a retrospective study

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveA common cavity deformity (CCD) is a deformed inner ear in which the cochlea and vestibule are confluent forming a common rudimentary cystic cavity that results in profound hearing loss. There are few studies paying attention to common cavity. Our group is engrossed in observing the improvement of auditory and verbal abilities in children who have received cochlear implantation (CI), and comparing these targets between children with common cavity and normal inner ear structure.Material and methodsA retrospective study was conducted in 12 patients with profound hearing loss that were divided into a common cavity group and a control group, six in each group matched in sex, age and time of implantation, based on inner ear structure. Categories of Auditory Performance (CAP) and speech intelligibility rating (SIR) scores and aided hearing thresholds were collected and compared between the two groups. All patients wore CI for more than 1 year at the Cochlear Center of Anhui Medical University from 2011 to 2015.ResultsPostoperative CAP and SIR scores were higher than before operation in both groups (p < 0.05), although the scores were lower in the CCD group than in the control group (p < 0.05). The aided threshold was also lower in the control group than in the CCD group (p < 0.05).ConclusionEven though audiological improvement in children with CCD was not as good as in those without CCD, CI provides benefits in auditory perception and communication skills in these children.

show abstract

“…14,22 A recent Italian study found that DHH toddlers who were implanted between 8 and 12 months developed age-appropriate levels of responsiveness and assertiveness (answering and asking questions) with communicative partners but that children who were implanted after 15 months of age were delayed in both overall language and in these social-communicative abilities. 23 Several research studies have found better pragmatic outcomes among preschool-aged DHH children who use sign languages. 24,25 Mothers and DHH children who used both a signed and a spoken language showed more cooperation and positive affect than pairs who only used spoken language.…”

Section: Preschool-age (0-5 Years)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Current Research in Pragmatic Language Use Among Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we provide a narrative review of research literature on the development of pragmatic skills and the social uses of language in children and adolescents, with a focus on those who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH). In the review, we consider how pragmatic skills may develop over time for DHH children and adolescents depending on age, language context, amplification devices, and languages and communication modalities. The implications of these findings for enhancing intervention programs for DHH children and adolescents and for considering ideal contexts for optimizing the pragmatic development of DHH children are considered.

show abstract

Social conversational skills development in early implanted children

Abstract: 4 Laryngoscope, 126:2098-2105, 2016.

Cited by 27 publications

References 43 publications

Pragmatic Language Skills: A Comparison of Children With Cochlear Implants and Children Without Hearing Loss

Pragmatic Language Skills: A Comparison of Children With Cochlear Implants and Children Without Hearing Loss

Cochlear implantation outcomes in children with common cavity deformity; a retrospective study

Current Research in Pragmatic Language Use Among Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About