Examining the Impact of Cochlear Implantation on the Early Gross Motor Development of Children With a Hearing Loss
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In Brief Objective: As deaf children are now implanted at a very early age, the influence of a cochlear implant (CI) on the early motor development of children with a hearing loss becomes relevant. Design: Forty-eight children with a hearing loss were included in this controlled prospective follow-up study and were subdivided into a CI group (n = 23) receiving a CI during the follow-up period and a control group (n = 25) receiving no CI during the follow-up period. All children were assessed around the ages of 6 (T1), 12 (T2), 18 (T3), and 24 (T4) months with a motor test battery consisting of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2 (PDMS-2), Alberta Infant Motor Scales (AIMS) (only at T1 and T2), and Ghent Developmental Balance Test (GDBT) (only at T3 and T4). In addition, collic vestibular-evoked myogenic potential testing was performed in all children. Group differences in PDMS-2 Gross Motor Quotient (GMQ), Fine Motor Quotient, AIMS z score, and GDBT z score were analyzed using Linear Mixed Model (LMM) analysis for repeated measures. Results: For PDMS-2 GMQ, the LMM revealed significant effects for group (p = 0.04), test moment (p < 0.001), and for the interaction between these two factors (p = 0.035). Contrasts indicated that the CI group showed a greater deterioration in PDMS-2 GMQ between T2 and T3 compared with that showed by the control group (p = 0.002). The LMM for PDMS-2 Fine Motor Quotient and AIMS z score showed no significant effects. For GDBT z score, the LMM pointed out significant effects for group (p = 0.013) and test moment (p < 0.001), but no significant interaction between these two factors. Contrasts indicated that the CI group performed significantly weaker than the control group at both test moments (T3 and T4; all p < 0.012) and that both groups showed a significant recovery in GDBTz scores between T3 and T4 (all p < 0.012). Conclusions: This study shows that the trajectory of gross motor development can be changed in children with a hearing loss after a cochlear implantation. Implanted children show a drop in their gross motor performance within the age range of 6 to 18 months, at which period the majority of the implantations took place, with a tendency of recovery toward the age of 2 years. However, longer follow-up will be necessary to trace whether the implanted children catch up their motor delay in comparison with nonimplanted children with a hearing loss at later age. Forty-eight children with a hearing loss were included in this controlled prospective follow-up study and were subdivided in a CI group and a control group. All children were assessed around the ages of 6, 12, 18, and 24 months with a motor test battery and colic Vestibular Evoked Myogenic Potential (cVEMP) testing. This study shows that the trajectory of gross motor development can be changed in children with a hearing loss after cochlear implantation. Implanted children show a drop in their gross motor performance within the age range of 6 to 18 months, when the majority of the implantations took place, with a tendency of recovery afterward.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».