Evaluation of gap filling skills and reading mistakes of cochlear implanted and normally hearing students

This study aimed to (1) evaluate the gap filling skills and reading mistakes of students with cochlear implants, and to (2) compare their results with those of their normal-hearing peers. The effects of implantation age and total time of cochlear implant use were analyzed in relation to the subjects...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational journal of pediatric otorhinolaryngology Vol. 109; pp. 27 - 30
Main Authors Göçmenler, Hülya, Çiprut, Ayça
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Ireland Elsevier B.V 01.06.2018
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:This study aimed to (1) evaluate the gap filling skills and reading mistakes of students with cochlear implants, and to (2) compare their results with those of their normal-hearing peers. The effects of implantation age and total time of cochlear implant use were analyzed in relation to the subjects' reading skills development. The study included 19 students who underwent cochlear implantation and 20 students with normal hearing, who were enrolled at the 6th to 8th grades. The subjects' ages ranged between 12 and 14 years old. Their reading skills were evaluated by using the Informal Reading Inventory. A significant relationship were found between implanted and normal-hearing students in terms of the percentages of reading error and the percentages of gap filling scores. The average order of the reading errors of students using cochlear implants was higher than that of normal-hearing students. As for the gap filling, the performances of implanted students in the passage are lower than those of their normal-hearing peers. No significant relationship was found between the variables tested in terms of age and duration of implantation on the reading performances of implanted students. Even if they were early implanted, there were significant differences in the reading performances of implanted students compared with those of their normal-hearing peers in older classes.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0165-5876
1872-8464
1872-8464
DOI:10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.03.014