Cochlear Implant Use Remains Consistent Over Time in Children With Single-Sided Deafness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To measure the acceptance of a cochlear implant by children with single-sided deafness (SSD) using datalogging technology in the cochlear implant processor. DESIGN: Datalogs from follow-up clinical audiology appointments for 23 children with SSD were extracted from their cochlear implant processors ranging from 1 to 8 visits (M = 3.74, SD = 1.79). The number of hours the cochlear implant was in use per day, the number of times the coil disconnected from the internal device, and the percentage of daily cochlear implant use in different auditory environments were collected from the datalogs. Linear mixed-effects regressions were used to analyze the relationship between age, hearing experience, cochlear implant use, and coil-offs per day. Nonlinear regressions were conducted to evaluate cochlear implant use in different environments. RESULTS: Children with SSD wore their cochlear implants for 6.22 (SD = 2.81; range = 0.0004 to 14.74) hours per day on average. No significant change in cochlear implant use was seen as the children grew older or gained more hearing experience. As hearing experience increased, the number of coil-offs per day was reduced. Preschoolers spent more time in "music" and "speech" and less time in "noise" and "quiet" than older and younger children while older children spent more time in "speech-in-noise." CONCLUSIONS: Children with SSD consistently wear their cochlear implants. However, the auditory environments to which they are exposed vary over time. Regular cochlear implant use by this population suggests that it does not detract from a normal-hearing ear and that children with SSD appreciate access to bilateral input.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".