Evaluating The Short-term Effects of Home-based Computerized Multi-domain Cognitive Training in Adult Cochlear Implant Users: A Prospective Randomized Intervention Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is growing evidence in support of the cognitive remediation following cochlear implantation in children.To the best of our knowledge, the role of generalized cognitive training (CT) in adult cochlear implant users has not been explored.Objectives: To determine the effects of computerized CT with standard therapy on adult cochlear implant users" speech comprehension in noise, cognitive functions and auditory ability.Methods: A prospective, unblinded, single-center, randomized controlled trial with cross-over study design and two treatment arms.Participants (N = 12) from the Maritime Provinces in Canada received CT (via CogniFit) either right after the first assessment or ten weeks later in the immediate (n = 7) and delayed (n = 5) treatment groups respectively.Speech comprehension in noise, assessed by AzBio sentence test, was the primary outcome measure.The secondary outcomes were neuropsychological assessments -CANTABeclipse for Clinical Trials, and selfreported auditory ability -Speech Spatial Qualities questionnaire (SSQ).Data from 2 participants were excluded due to lack of follow-up, data from the remaining participants were analyzed by mixed models in SPSS (version 20) and R (version 3.0.2.).Results: Based upon analyses combined across two groups, CT with standard therapy (n = 10) marginally enhanced sentence comprehension in noise, AzBio score, β = 2.58, 95% CI [-2.84, 8.02], p > .05.Furthermore, CT demonstrated statistically significant, but modest improvement in SSQ total scores, β = 0.60, 95% CI [0.14, 1.05] and certain CANTABeclipse test scores.Namely, (i) SOC number of problems solved in minimum moves, β = 1.12, 95% CI [0.29, 1.94], for Spatial Planning (ii) SWM total errors for problems with 4 to 8 boxes, β = -11.32,95% CI [-19.82,-2.81] and strategy, β = -3.08,95% CI [-4.36, -1.81], for Spatial Working Memory, (iii) RVP A′, β = 0.015, 95% CI [0.005, 0.026], for Sustained Attention and (iv) VRM free recall, β = 1.25, 95% CI [0.25, 2.26] and recognition, β = 0.76, 95% CI [0.32, 1.20], for verbal memory.Conclusion: Ten weeks of cognitive training modestly enhanced executive and working memory skills in adult cochlear implant users.This finding suggests adult cochlear implant users" brains are malleable.The treatment effect estimates for speech comprehension in noise did not reach a statistically significant level.A longitudinal multicentered trial with a large sample size is needed to make evidence-based recommendation for the routine clinical care of cochlear implant users.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrial.gov unique
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".