ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Assessing Auditory Processing in Children with Listening Difficulties: A Pilot Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Auditory Processing Disorder in childhood: a critical appraisal of diagnostic validity, functional assessment, and interdisciplinary practice.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Review
- Auditory Processing and Speech Sound Disorders: Behavioral and Electrophysiological Findings.Audiology research · 2025Article
- Investigation of the relationship between hyperacusis and auditory processing difficulties in individuals with normal hearing.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAuditory processing disorders (APD) may be one of the problems experienced by children with listening difficulties (LiD). The combination of auditory behavioural and electrophysiological tests could help to provide a better understanding of the abilities/disabilities of children with LiD. The current study aimed to quantify the auditory processing abilities and function in children with LiD.
methodsTwenty children, ten with LiD (age = 8.46; SD = 1.39) and ten typically developing (TD) (age = 9.45; SD = 1.57) participated in this study. All children were evaluated with auditory processing tests as well as with attention and phonemic synthesis tasks. Electrophysiological measures were also conducted with click and speech auditory brainstem responses (ABR).
resultsChildren with LiD performed significantly worse than TD children for most behavioural tasks, indicating shortcomings in functional auditory processing. Moreover, the click-ABR wave I amplitude was smaller, and the speech-ABR waves D and E latencies were longer for the LiD children compared to the results of TD children. No significant difference was found when evaluating neural correlates between groups.
conclusionsCombining behavioural testing with click-ABR and speech-ABR can highlight functional and neurophysiological deficiencies in children with learning and listening issues, especially at the brainstem level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.