Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41913305›Full record

ArticleEar and hearing

Phoneme Perception in Children With Bilateral Cochlear Implants or Hearing Aids in Quiet, Noise, and Reverberation.

Maaike Van Eeckhoutte, Regitze Ardenkjær-Husted, Chunlong Zhao, Torsten Dau

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Maaike Van EeckhoutteHearing Systems Section, Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-5612-5326
Regitze Ardenkjær-HustedCopenhagen Hearing and Balance Centre, Department of Ear, Nose, Throat & Audiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Chunlong ZhaoHearing Systems Section, Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.
Torsten DauHearing Systems Section, Department of Health Technology, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-8110-4343

Funding

Helge Linnebæks Fond
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe assessment of aided phoneme perception is essential in validating whether hearing aids and cochlear implants adequately meet the amplification and rehabilitation needs of children. Phonemes are commonly used in such assessments to minimize the influence of semantic context and vocabulary knowledge. Traditionally, they have been presented by clinicians using their own voices. This study directly compared the performance of phoneme detection, discrimination, and identification among children with normal hearing, children using hearing aids, children with cochlear implants, and adults with normal hearing. Laboratory procedures and recorded sound files were used throughout. In addition, phoneme discrimination performance was assessed in challenging acoustic environments-specifically those with noise and/or reverberation-mirroring the types of settings children frequently encounter.

designA total of 60 children and 42 adults participated in the study. The children had an average age of 10 ± 2 yrs, and the adults an average age of 27 ± 5 yrs. The children were divided into 3 groups of 20: those with normal hearing, those using bilateral hearing aids, and those with bilateral cochlear implants. Children with hearing devices were recruited through the Copenhagen Hearing and Balance Center (Rigshospitalet, Denmark) and were tested using their own devices, all fitted according to present best practices. Aided phoneme detection and identification were assessed using the Ling 6(HL) CD sound files, while phoneme discrimination was evaluated using a subset of the DANOK speech corpus. Testing was conducted in a spatial hearing laboratory to examine the impact of noise and reverberation on performance.

resultsThe results of this study indicate that, aside from minor differences in low-frequency speech phonemes, there were no significant differences between children with hearing aids and those with cochlear implants in phoneme detection, identification, or discrimination across a range of acoustic conditions. All children demonstrated Ling sound detection thresholds in quiet within normal limits, with average thresholds across all Ling sounds below 20 dB HL for all groups (rising to a maximum average of 22 dB HL when analyzed per Ling sound and participant group). Phoneme discrimination was significantly affected by reverberation and noise in all children-more so than in adults-with the most pronounced effects observed in children using hearing aids or cochlear implants.

conclusionsThe procedures for aided phoneme detection, discrimination, and identification presented in this study are valuable tools for objectively assessing outcomes and validating benefit in children using hearing aids and cochlear implants. This is particularly important for children with cochlear implants, as electroacoustic verification through real-ear measures is not possible for these devices. The results suggest that phoneme perception in children with hearing aids and those with cochlear implants-despite the fundamentally different nature of these technologies (acoustic versus electric stimulation)-does not differ significantly. The reduced performance in noisy and reverberant conditions among children, especially those with hearing devices, underscores the importance of optimizing signal to noise ratios and acoustic environments in children's everyday settings to support speech perception, auditory development, and overall wellbeing.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantsHearing AidsHearing Loss, BilateralNoisePhoneticsSpeech PerceptionAdolescentAdultAuditory AcuityCase-Control StudiesChildFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultChildrenCochlear ImplantsHearing aidsNoisePhoneme perceptionReverberationSpeech

Identifiers

PMID41913305
PMCPMC13252971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.