Skip to Main Content
Table 1. 

Existing Studies Investigating Acoustic Discrimination in CI Children Using the MMN

StudyNo. of PatientsAge at Hearing LossAge at ImplantationAge at MeasurementDuration of Implant UseStimuliResultsType of MMNa
Kileny et al., 1997 n = 14 Not stated ca. 3–9 years 4–12 years 0.7–7.0 years 1) Intensity: 75 dB vs. 90 dB MMN elicited in all subjects for all stimulus types. Negative correlation for MMN latency in frequency, condition, and language score Within-block MMN 
2) Frequency: 1500 Hz vs. 3000 Hz 
3) Vowel type: /heed/ vs. /who'd/ 
Ponton et al., 2000  n = 12 3 congenital, others: identification up to 5.1 years Not stated 6–18 years Not stated Click and pulse trains (10 clicks/pulses per trains vs. 1–9 clicks/pulses per train) MMN development similar to normal hearing peers Across-block MMN 
Singh et al., 2004  n = 35 14 congenital, 7 prelingual, 2 postlingual 2–15 years 7–17 years 1–10 years Consonant type: /da/ vs. /ba/, duration: 275 msec, ISI: 1000 msec MMN visible in 10 of 35 subjects (of which 5 congenital). Positive correlation of MMN presence with language score Across-block MMN 
Watson et al., 2007  n = 15 14 congenital, 1 early acquired 2.7–6.0 years 7–13 years 3.9–7.9 years Pitch: 500 Hz vs. 2500 Hz, duration: 50 msec, ISI: 900 msec MMN for the low frequency deviant in all subjects. MMN of implanted children similar to normal hearing controls Across-block MMN 
Liang et al., 2014, n = 18 (sedated) Identified at 0.4–4.1 years 1.3–6.1 1–6 years 0.0–0.6 years Pitch: 1000 Hz vs. 1500 Hz, duration: 50 msec, ISI: 550 msec MMN incidence increases with duration of implant use (none at M0, 17/18 at M6), latency decreases with time Within-block MMN 
StudyNo. of PatientsAge at Hearing LossAge at ImplantationAge at MeasurementDuration of Implant UseStimuliResultsType of MMNa
Kileny et al., 1997 n = 14 Not stated ca. 3–9 years 4–12 years 0.7–7.0 years 1) Intensity: 75 dB vs. 90 dB MMN elicited in all subjects for all stimulus types. Negative correlation for MMN latency in frequency, condition, and language score Within-block MMN 
2) Frequency: 1500 Hz vs. 3000 Hz 
3) Vowel type: /heed/ vs. /who'd/ 
Ponton et al., 2000  n = 12 3 congenital, others: identification up to 5.1 years Not stated 6–18 years Not stated Click and pulse trains (10 clicks/pulses per trains vs. 1–9 clicks/pulses per train) MMN development similar to normal hearing peers Across-block MMN 
Singh et al., 2004  n = 35 14 congenital, 7 prelingual, 2 postlingual 2–15 years 7–17 years 1–10 years Consonant type: /da/ vs. /ba/, duration: 275 msec, ISI: 1000 msec MMN visible in 10 of 35 subjects (of which 5 congenital). Positive correlation of MMN presence with language score Across-block MMN 
Watson et al., 2007  n = 15 14 congenital, 1 early acquired 2.7–6.0 years 7–13 years 3.9–7.9 years Pitch: 500 Hz vs. 2500 Hz, duration: 50 msec, ISI: 900 msec MMN for the low frequency deviant in all subjects. MMN of implanted children similar to normal hearing controls Across-block MMN 
Liang et al., 2014, n = 18 (sedated) Identified at 0.4–4.1 years 1.3–6.1 1–6 years 0.0–0.6 years Pitch: 1000 Hz vs. 1500 Hz, duration: 50 msec, ISI: 550 msec MMN incidence increases with duration of implant use (none at M0, 17/18 at M6), latency decreases with time Within-block MMN 

aFor the definition of “Within-block MMN” and “Across-block MMN,” see the section titled: Type of MMN: Comparison within or across Blocks?

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal