Acoustic Analysis of Voice in Cochlear Implant Recipients with Post-Meningitic Hearing Loss
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the critical time period between the onset of sensorineural hearing loss and cochlear implantation with respect to normal voice production in children with post-meningitic hearing loss. Acoustic measures of voice production were obtained from ten paediatric cochlear implant recipients with post-meningitic hearing loss. Acoustic measures were obtained utilising the Multi-Dimensional Voice Program and Computerized Speech Laboratory (Kay Elemetrics Corp.). Measures were based on sustained phonation of the vowel /a/. Acoustic parameters included fundamental frequency, short- and long-term frequency perturbation, and short- and long-term amplitude perturbation. Measures of fundamental frequency and short-term frequency and amplitude perturbation were comparable to values of children with normal hearing. Long-term control of frequency was within normal limits for subjects with a period of auditory deprivation of less than four months. Measures of long-term amplitude perturbation were normal for all patients except those with cochlear ossification. Early restoration of auditory feedback with cochlear implantation, the absence of cochlear ossification, residual aided hearing following meningitis, and auditory-verbal therapy were identified as factors in preserving the long-term control of frequency and amplitude in the setting of post-meningitic hearing loss.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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".