ArticleEar and hearing
The Relationship Between Linguistic Input and Communication Outcomes in Children With Unilateral Hearing Loss: The Impact of Device Fitting.
Article in Ear and hearing. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAlthough the benefits of hearing devices in children with bilateral hearing loss are well established, evidence in unilateral hearing loss (UHL) remains limited. This study aimed to (i) examine whether device fitting influences the relationship between linguistic input and communication outcomes (language and functional listening) in young children with UHL, and (ii) assess whether consistency of device use affects this relationship.
designA longitudinal study included 43 device-fitted and 61 non-fitted children with UHL at 12 mo (mean worse-ear hearing level: 80.9 versus 86.7 dB HL), and a subset of 26 and 15, respectively, at 3 yrs. Linguistic input (adult word count [AWC], conversational turn count [CTC]), nonlinguistic input, and child vocalizations were measured using Language ENvironment Analysis. Language was assessed with the Australian English Developmental Vocabulary Inventory at 12 mo, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and Preschool Language Scales at 3 yrs, and child vocalization count at both ages. Functional listening was assessed using the Parent Evaluation on Aural/Oral Performance (PEACH) questionnaire. Linear regression examined whether device fitting influenced the associations between linguistic input and communication outcomes. Similar regression analyses were completed in fitted children to assess the influence of consistency of device use on the relationship between linguistic input and communication outcomes.
resultsLinguistic and nonlinguistic input did not differ by device status. In cross-sectional analyses, better language abilities were found in children with higher CTC at both 12 mo and 3 yrs. Better functional listening abilities were found in children with higher CTC at 12 mo. A similar but not significant trend existed at 3 yrs. Associations between outcomes (except child vocalization count) and AWC were all nonsignificant. The nature of the association between AWC or CTC and communication outcomes did not vary between the fitted and not-fitted children in any of these analyses. Likewise, consistency of device use did not influence the association between linguistic input and communication outcomes. In longitudinal analyses, CTC increased with age similarly in both groups, however, no associations were evident between early linguistic input and later communication outcomes.
conclusionSimilar to children with bilateral hearing loss, better communication outcomes in children with UHL are associated with increased two-way conversations with caregivers. There was no evidence that device fitting or consistency in device use affected this association. Outcomes underscore the importance of interactive communication between caregivers and children, regardless of fitting status.
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.