Graeme Clark Collection

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Vowel imitation task: results over time for 28 cochlear implant children under the age of eight years
    Dettman, S. J. ; Barker, E. J. ; Dowell, R. C. ; Dawson, P. W. ; Blamey, P. J. ; Clark, Graeme M. ( 1995)
    With increasing numbers of implanted children under the age of 4 years, numerous researchers have reminded us of the need for valid, sensitive, and reliable tests of developing speech perception.1,2 In addition to studies of the efficacy of implanted prostheses, there is a need to investigate the many variables that influence children's communicative performance, such as changes in speech-coding strategy, updated speech-processing systems, the effects of various training regimens, and the selection of educational and communication modes.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Speech perception in children using the advanced Speak speech-processing strategy
    Cowan, R. S. C. ; Brown, C. ; Whitford, L. A. ; Galvin, K. L. ; Sarant, J. Z. ; Barker, E. J. ; Shaw, S. ; King, A. ; Skok, M. ; Seligman, P. M. ; Dowell, R. C. ; Everingham, C. ; Gibson, W. P. R. ; Clark, Graeme M. ( 1995)
    The Speak speech-processing strategy, developed by the University of Melbourne and commercialized by Cochlear Pty Limited for use in the new Spectra 22 speech processor, has been shown to provide improved speech perception for adults in both quiet and noisy situations. The present study evaluated the ability of children experienced in the use of the Multipeak (Mpeak) speech-processing strategy (implemented in the Nucleus Minisystem-22 cochlear implant) to adapt to and benefit from the advanced Speak speech-processing strategy (implemented in the Nucleus Spectra 22 speech processor). Twelve children were assessed using Mpeak and Speak over a period of 8 months. All of the children had over 1 year's previous experience with Mpeak, and all were able to score significantly on open-set word and sentence tests using the cochlear implant alone. Children were assessed with both live-voice and recorded speech materials, including Consonant-Nucleus-Consonant monosyllabic words and Speech Intelligibility Test sentences. Assessments were made in both quiet and in noise. Assessments were made at 3-week intervals to investigate the ability of the children to adapt to the new speech-processing strategy. For most of the children, a significant advantage was evident when using the Speak strategy as compared with Mpeak. For 4 of the children, there was no decrement in speech perception scores immediately following fitting with Speak. Eight of the children showed a small (10% to 20%) decrement in speech perception scores for between 3 and 6 weeks following the changeover to Speak. After 24 weeks' experience with Speak, 11 of the children had shown a steady increase in speech perception scores, with final Speak scores higher than for Mpeak. Only 1 child showed a significant decrement in speech perception with Speak, which did not recover to original Mpeak levels.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Preliminary results for the Cochlear Corporation multielectrode intracochlear implant in six prelingually deaf patients
    Clark, Graeme M. ; Busby, Peter A. ; Roberts, Susan A. ; Dowell, Richard C. ; Blamey, Peter J. ; Mecklenburg, Dianne J. ; Webb, Robert L. ; Pyman, Brian C. ; Franz, Burkhard K. ( 1987)
    The preliminary results from this study indicate that some prelingually deaf patients may get worthwhile help from a multiple-electrode cochlear implant that uses a formant-based speech processing strategy. It is encouraging that these improvements can occur in young adults and teenagers. The results for two children are also encouraging. A 10-year-old child obtained significant improvement on some speech perception tests. It was easy to set thresholds and comfortable listening levels on a 5-year-old child, and he is now a regular user of the device. There are, however, considerable variations in performance among the prelingual patients, which may be related to the following factors: whether they have had some hearing after birth, the method of education used, the motivation of the patient, and age at implantation.