ArticleNeuroscience research2021
Estimating the reduced benefit of infant-directed speech in cochlear implant-related speech processing.
Article in Neuroscience research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The everyday speech environments of preschoolers with and without cochlear implants.Journal of child language · 2025Article
- Speech-evoked cortical activities and speech recognition in adult cochlear implant listeners: a review of functional near-infrared spectroscopy studies.Experimental brain research · 2024Review
- On the interplay between speech perception and production: insights from research and theories.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Review
- A Modified Pediatric Ranked Order Speech Perception Score to Assess Speech Recognition Development in Children With Cochlear Implants.American journal of audiology · 2022Article
- A Framework for Understanding the Relation Between Spoken Language Input and Outcomes for Children with Cochlear Implants.Child development perspectives · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Caregivers modify their speech when talking to infants, a specific type of speech known as infant-directed speech (IDS). This speaking style facilitates language learning compared to adult-directed speech (ADS) in infants with normal hearing (NH). While infants with NH and those with cochlear implants (CIs) prefer listening to IDS over ADS, it is yet unknown how CI processing may affect the acoustic distinctiveness between ADS and IDS, as well as the degree of intelligibility of these. This study analyzed speech of seven female adult talkers to model the effects of simulated CI processing on (1) acoustic distinctiveness between ADS and IDS, (2) estimates of intelligibility of caregivers' speech in ADS and IDS, and (3) individual differences in caregivers' ADS-to-IDS modification and estimated speech intelligibility. Results suggest that CI processing is substantially detrimental to the acoustic distinctiveness between ADS and IDS, as well as to the intelligibility benefit derived from ADS-to-IDS modifications. Moreover, the observed variability across individual talkers in acoustic implementation of ADS-to-IDS modification and the estimated speech intelligibility was significantly reduced due to CI processing. The findings are discussed in the context of the link between IDS and language learning in infants with CIs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.