MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Background and Educational Characteristics of Prelingually Deaf Children Implanted by Five Years of Age

2003· article· en· W2012161955 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ann E. Geers, Christine Brenner

Bibliographic record

VenueEar and Hearing · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)Cochlear implantImplantMedicineIntervention (counseling)MainstreamPsychologyCochlear implantationAudiologyDevelopmental psychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Purpose This study documents child, family and educational characteristics of a large representative sample of 8- to 9-yr-old prelingually deaf children who received a cochlear implant by 5 yr of age. Because pre-existing factors such as the child’s gender, family characteristics, additional handicaps, age at onset of deafness and at implant, may affect postimplant outcomes, these variables must be accounted for before the impact of educational factors on performance with an implant can be adequately determined. Classroom variables that may affect postimplant outcomes include placement in public or private, mainstream or special education, oral or total communication environments. Other intervention variables include type and amount of individual therapy, experience of the therapist and parent participation in therapy. Documenting these characteristics for a large representative sample of implanted children can provide clinicians and researchers with insight regarding the types of families who sought early cochlear implantation for their children and the types of educational programs in which they placed their children after implantation. It is important to undertake studies that control for as many of these factors as possible so that the relative benefits of specific educational approaches for helping children to get the most benefit from their cochlear implant can be identified. Method Over a 4-yr period, 181 children from across the US and Canada, accompanied by a parent, attended a cochlear implant research camp. Parents completed questionnaires in which they reported the child’s medical and educational history, characteristics of the family, and their participation in the child’s therapy. The parent listed names and addresses of clinicians who had provided individual speech/language therapy to the child and signed permission for these clinicians to complete questionnaires describing this therapy. Results To the extent that this sample is representative of those families seeking a cochlear implant for their child, especially during the initial period of device availability, this population can be characterized as follows. Most parents had normal hearing, were of majority (white) ethnicity and had more education and higher incomes than the general population. The families tended to be intact with both a mother and a father who involved their hearing-impaired child in family activities on a regular basis. The children were enrolled in the full range of educational placements available across the United States and Canada. Fairly even distributions of children from public and private schools, special education and mainstream classes and oral and total communication methodologies were represented. Educational placement changed as children gained increased experience with a cochlear implant. They received an increased emphasis on speech and auditory skills in their classroom settings and tended to move from private school and special education settings to public school and mainstream programs. These data support the position that early cochlear implantation is a cost effective procedure that allows deaf children to participate in a normal school environment with hearing age mates. This report describes child, family, and educational characteristics of a large sample of 8- to 9-year-old prelingually deaf children who received a cochlear implant by 5 years of age and who participated in the studies described in this supplement. Clinicians and researchers may gain some insight from this description of families who sought early cochlear implantation for their children. The children were enrolled in the full range of educational placements available across the United States and Canada. As children gained increased experience with a cochlear implant, they received an increased emphasis on speech and auditory skills in their classroom settings and tended to move from private school and special education settings to public school and mainstream programs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations218
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEar and HearingSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207