Evolution of the speech intelligibility of prelinguistically deaf children who received a cochlear implant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2 main objectives of this investigation are (1) to assess the evolution of the speech intelligibility of 12 prelinguistically deaf children implanted between 25 and 78 months of age and (2) to clarify the influence of the age at implantation on the intelligibility. Speech productions videorecorded at 6, 18 and 36 months following surgery during a standardized free play session. Selected syllables were then presented to 40 adults listeners who were asked to identify the vowels or the consonants they heard and to judge the quality of the segments. Perceived vowels were then located in the vocalic space whereas consonants were classified according to voicing, manner and place of articulation. 3 (Groups) ×3 (Times) ANOVA with repeated measures revealed a clear influence of time as well as age at implantation on the acquisition patterns. Speech intelligibility of these implanted children tended to improve as their experience with the device increased. Based on these results, it is proposed that sensory restoration following cochlear implant served as a probe to develop articulatory strategies allowing them to reach the intended acoustico-perceptual target.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".