AIM: review the literature for studies that describe the language development of children after they receive cochlear implants. RESEARCH STRATEGIES: Literature review on the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Science Direct databases, tracing the selection and critical analysis stages in the journals found and selected. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected original articles looking at children with cochlear implants, which mentioned language development after surgery. Case studies, dissertations, books chapters, editorials, and original articles that did not mention aspects of oral communication development, perception of sounds and speech, and other stages of human development, in the title, abstract, or text, were excluded. DATA ANALYSIS: A protocol was created for this study including the following points: author, year, location, sample, type of study, objectives, methods used, main results, and conclusion. RESULTS: 5,052 articles were found based on the search descriptors and free terms. Of this total, 3,414 were excluded due to the title, 1,245 due to the abstract, and 358 from reading the full text; we selected 35, of which 28 were repeated. In the end, seven articles were analyzed in this review. CONCLUSION: We conclude that cochlear implant users have slower linguistic and educational development than their peers with normal hearing - though they are better than conventional prostheses users - and they are able to match them over time. There is great variability in the test methodologies, thus reducing the effectiveness and reliability of the results found.
AIM: review the literature for studies that describe the language development of children after they receive cochlear implants. RESEARCH STRATEGIES: Literature review on the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Science Direct databases, tracing the selection and critical analysis stages in the journals found and selected. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected original articles looking at children with cochlear implants, which mentioned language development after surgery. Case studies, dissertations, books chapters, editorials, and original articles that did not mention aspects of oral communication development, perception of sounds and speech, and other stages of human development, in the title, abstract, or text, were excluded. DATA ANALYSIS: A protocol was created for this study including the following points: author, year, location, sample, type of study, objectives, methods used, main results, and conclusion. RESULTS: 5,052 articles were found based on the search descriptors and free terms. Of this total, 3,414 were excluded due to the title, 1,245 due to the abstract, and 358 from reading the full text; we selected 35, of which 28 were repeated. In the end, seven articles were analyzed in this review. CONCLUSION: We conclude that cochlear implant users have slower linguistic and educational development than their peers with normal hearing - though they are better than conventional prostheses users - and they are able to match them over time. There is great variability in the test methodologies, thus reducing the effectiveness and reliability of the results found.