Literature DB >> 29342056

"Product" Versus "Process" Measures in Assessing Speech Recognition Outcomes in Adults With Cochlear Implants.

Aaron C Moberly1, Irina Castellanos1, Kara J Vasil1, Oliver F Adunka1, David B Pisoni2,3.   

Abstract

HYPOTHESES: 1) When controlling for age in postlingual adult cochlear implant (CI) users, information-processing functions, as assessed using "process" measures of working memory capacity, inhibitory control, information-processing speed, and fluid reasoning, will predict traditional "product" outcome measures of speech recognition. 2) Demographic/audiologic factors, particularly duration of deafness, duration of CI use, degree of residual hearing, and socioeconomic status, will impact performance on underlying information-processing functions, as assessed using process measures.
BACKGROUND: Clinicians and researchers rely heavily on endpoint product measures of accuracy in speech recognition to gauge patient outcomes postoperatively. However, these measures are primarily descriptive and were not designed to assess the underlying core information-processing operations that are used during speech recognition. In contrast, process measures reflect the integrity of elementary core subprocesses that are operative during behavioral tests using complex speech signals.
METHODS: Forty-two experienced adult CI users were tested using three product measures of speech recognition, along with four process measures of working memory capacity, inhibitory control, speed of lexical/phonological access, and nonverbal fluid reasoning. Demographic and audiologic factors were also assessed.
RESULTS: Scores on product measures were associated with core process measures of speed of lexical/phonological access and nonverbal fluid reasoning. After controlling for participant age, demographic and audiologic factors did not correlate with process measure scores.
CONCLUSION: Findings provide support for the important foundational roles of information processing operations in speech recognition outcomes of postlingually deaf patients who have received CIs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29342056      PMCID: PMC5807136          DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001694

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.311


  25 in total

1.  The Raven's progressive matrices: change and stability over culture and time.

Authors:  J Raven
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Relating quality of life to outcomes and predictors in adult cochlear implant users: Are we measuring the right things?

Authors:  Aaron C Moberly; Michael S Harris; Lauren Boyce; Kara Vasil; Taylor Wucinich; David B Pisoni; Jodi Baxter; Christin Ray; Valeriy Shafiro
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 3.325

3.  Predictive models for cochlear implantation in elderly candidates.

Authors:  Janice Leung; Nae-Yuh Wang; Jennifer D Yeagle; Jill Chinnici; Stephen Bowditch; Howard W Francis; John K Niparko
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2005-12

Review 4.  The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition.

Authors:  T A Salthouse
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Hearing loss and cognition among older adults in the United States.

Authors:  Frank R Lin
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2011-07-18       Impact factor: 6.053

6.  Cochlear Implants in Adults: Effects of Age and Duration of Deafness on Speech Recognition.

Authors:  Jason A Beyea; Kyle P McMullen; Michael S Harris; Derek M Houston; Jennifer M Martin; Virginia A Bolster; Oliver F Adunka; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 2.311

7.  Does quality of life depend on speech recognition performance for adult cochlear implant users?

Authors:  Natalie R Capretta; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2015-08-08       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  Hearing loss and cognitive decline in older adults.

Authors:  Frank R Lin; Kristine Yaffe; Jin Xia; Qian-Li Xue; Tamara B Harris; Elizabeth Purchase-Helzner; Suzanne Satterfield; Hilsa N Ayonayon; Luigi Ferrucci; Eleanor M Simonsick
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-02-25       Impact factor: 21.873

9.  The role of early language experience in the development of speech perception and phonological processing abilities: evidence from 5-year-olds with histories of otitis media with effusion and low socioeconomic status.

Authors:  Susan Nittrouer; Lisa Thuente Burton
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.288

10.  Pre-, per- and postoperative factors affecting performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants: a new conceptual model over time.

Authors:  Diane S Lazard; Christophe Vincent; Frédéric Venail; Paul Van de Heyning; Eric Truy; Olivier Sterkers; Piotr H Skarzynski; Henryk Skarzynski; Karen Schauwers; Stephen O'Leary; Deborah Mawman; Bert Maat; Andrea Kleine-Punte; Alexander M Huber; Kevin Green; Paul J Govaerts; Bernard Fraysse; Richard Dowell; Norbert Dillier; Elaine Burke; Andy Beynon; François Bergeron; Deniz Başkent; Françoise Artières; Peter J Blamey
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-09       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  10 in total

1.  Neurocognitive Factors Contributing to Cochlear Implant Candidacy.

Authors:  Aaron C Moberly; Irina Castellanos; Jameson K Mattingly
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 2.311

2.  Nonverbal Reasoning as a Contributor to Sentence Recognition Outcomes in Adults With Cochlear Implants.

Authors:  Jameson K Mattingly; Irina Castellanos; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 2.311

3.  How Does Nonverbal Reasoning Affect Sentence Recognition in Adults with Cochlear Implants and Normal-Hearing Peers?

Authors:  Aaron C Moberly; Jameson K Mattingly; Irina Castellanos
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 1.854

4.  Preoperative Visual Measures of Verbal Learning and Memory and their Relations to Speech Recognition After Cochlear Implantation.

Authors:  Christin Ray; David B Pisoni; Emily Lu; William G Kronenberger; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2022 May/Jun       Impact factor: 3.562

5.  High- and Low-Performing Adult Cochlear Implant Users on High-Variability Sentence Recognition: Differences in Auditory Spectral Resolution and Neurocognitive Functioning.

Authors:  Terrin N Tamati; Christin Ray; Kara J Vasil; David B Pisoni; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  Assessing Cognitive Abilities in High-Performing Cochlear Implant Users.

Authors:  Jake Hillyer; Elizabeth Elkins; Chantel Hazlewood; Stacey D Watson; Julie G Arenberg; Alexandra Parbery-Clark
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2019-01-15       Impact factor: 4.677

Review 7.  A surgeon-scientist's perspective and review of cognitive-linguistic contributions to adult cochlear implant outcomes.

Authors:  Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol       Date:  2020-11-06

Review 8.  Listening-Based Communication Ability in Adults With Hearing Loss: A Scoping Review of Existing Measures.

Authors:  Katie Neal; Catherine M McMahon; Sarah E Hughes; Isabelle Boisvert
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-03-10

9.  Lexical Effects on the Perceived Clarity of Noise-Vocoded Speech in Younger and Older Listeners.

Authors:  Terrin N Tamati; Victoria A Sevich; Emily M Clausing; Aaron C Moberly
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-04-01

10.  Relationship Between Electrocochleography, Angular Insertion Depth, and Cochlear Implant Speech Perception Outcomes.

Authors:  Michael W Canfarotta; Brendan P O'Connell; Christopher K Giardina; Emily Buss; Kevin D Brown; Margaret T Dillon; Meredith A Rooth; Harold C Pillsbury; Craig A Buchman; Oliver F Adunka; Douglas C Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2021 July/Aug       Impact factor: 3.562

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.