ArticleHNO2025
[Early language performance in the ELFRA questionnaire : Analysis of multicentre data from children with bilateral cochlear implants].
Article in HNO, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVery early bilateral cochlear implant (CI) provision is today's established standard for children. Therefore, the assessment of preverbal and verbal performance in very early stages of development is becoming increasingly important. Performance data from cohorts of children were evaluated and presented based on diagnostic assessment using chronological age (CA) and hearing age (HA).
methodsThe present study, as part of a retrospective multicentre study, included 4 cohorts (N = 72-233) of children with bilateral CI without additional disabilities. Their results in the German parent questionnaires Elternfragebögen zur Früherkennung von Risikokindern(ELFRA‑1 and ELFRA-2) subdivided for CA and HA were statistically analysed. The data were also analysed in terms of mono-/bilingualism and age at CI provision.
resultsOverall, verbal performance in relation to CA was lower than in relation to HA. Preverbal skills were largely CA appropriate. Children with bi-/multilingual language acquisition performed significantly lower. Verbal performance in ELFRA‑2 referenced to CA was negatively correlated with age at CI provision.
conclusionIn the case of early CI provision, CA should be the preferred reference mark in preverbal and verbal assessment in order to obtain exact individual performance levels and avoid bias in results. The percentiles determined are of limited use as generally valid reference values to which the individual performance of bilaterally implanted children could be compared. Further multicentre studies should be initiated.
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.