ArticleThe Laryngoscope2021
Speech Recognition as a Function of Age and Listening Experience in Adult Cochlear Implant Users.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cochlear Implantation in Adults 65 Years and Older With Single-sided Deafness and Asymmetric Hearing Loss.Otology & neurotology open · 2026Article
- Long-Term Use of Cochlear Implants in the Older Adult Population.Audiology & neuro-otology · 2026Article
- Consonant perception and error patterns in children and adults with cochlear implants.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2026Article
- Improvements in Perceived Abilities and Speech Recognition in Quiet and Noise for Older Adults With Single-sided Deafness or Asymmetric Hearing Loss: A Multi-center Investigation.Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2026Article
- Effect of Cochlear Implant Electrode Insertion Depth on Speech Perception Outcomes: A Systematic Review.Otology & neurotology open · 2023Article
- Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation in Age Subgroups of Veterans Over 50 Years Old.Otology & neurotology open · 2023Article
- A country-wide health policy in Chile for deaf adults using cochlear implants: Analysis of health determinants and social impacts.PloS one · 2023Article
- The recognition of time-compressed speech as a function of age in listeners with cochlear implants or normal hearing.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- 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
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectives/hypothesisSpeech recognition with a cochlear implant (CI) tends to be better for younger adults than older adults. However, older adults may take longer to reach asymptotic performance than younger adults. The present study aimed to characterize speech recognition as a function of age at implantation and listening experience for adult CI users. STUDY
designRetrospective review.
methodsA retrospective review identified 352 adult CI recipients (387 ears) with at least 5 years of device listening experience. Speech recognition, as measured with consonant-nucleus-consonant (CNC) words in quiet and AzBio sentences in a 10-talker noise masker (10 dB signal-to-noise ratio), was reviewed at 1, 5, and 10 years postactivation.
resultsSpeech recognition was better in younger listeners, and performance was stable or continued to improve through 10 years of CI listening experience. There was no indication of differences in acclimatization as a function of age at implantation. For the better performing CI recipients, an effect of age at implantation was more apparent for sentence recognition in noise than for word recognition in quiet.
conclusionsAdult CI recipients across the age range examined here experience speech recognition benefit with a CI. However, older adults perform more poorly than young adults for speech recognition in quiet and noise, with similar age effects through 5 to 10 years of listening experience. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 131:2106-2111, 2021.
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.