Cochlear Implantation for Adolescents and Adults with Prelinguistic Deafness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have suggested that individuals with long-term prelinguistic deafness who receive cochlear implants show little improvement in speech recognition skills. The purpose of this study was to examine the auditory functioning of individuals with prelinguistic deafness who received cochlear implants after the age of 12. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective study of open-set speech recognition was undertaken for 15 patients (adolescents and adults) with prelinguistic deafness who underwent implantation in the Ottawa Cochlear Implant Program. The results of open-set speech perception tests, both words and sentences, were reviewed to assess auditory functioning after implantation. Qualitative data using the Performance Inventory for Profound and Severe Loss questionnaire were also collected for the adults. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The results of this study indicate that individuals with long-term prelinguistic deafness can achieve significant open-set speech understanding with a cochlear implant, although there is a wide range of performance across patients. The results ranged from 0% to 74% for words and 0% to 98% for sentences.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".