Auditory Brainstem Response, Middle Latency Response, and Late Cortical Evoked Potentials in Children with Learning Disabilities

Purdy, Suzanne C.; Kelly, Andrea S.; Davies, Merren G.

doi:10.1055/s-0040-1715981

Cited by 102 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some studies have demonstrated different results when comparing click ABR results between normal children and those diagnosed with language disorders (i.e., lower amplitudes for waves I, III, and V compared with the control group) ( 19 ), learning difficulties (i.e., shorter latencies for wave V and interpeak III-V than the control group) ( 20 ), and specific language impairments (i.e., increased waves III and V latencies compared with the control group) ( 21 ). Among these findings, longer latencies and reduced wave amplitudes were more frequently observed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory evoked potentials: predicting speech therapy outcomes in children with phonological disorders

Leite¹,

Wertzner²,

Gonçalves³

et al. 2014

Clinics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES:This study investigated whether neurophysiologic responses (auditory evoked potentials) differ between typically developed children and children with phonological disorders and whether these responses are modified in children with phonological disorders after speech therapy.METHODS:The participants included 24 typically developing children (Control Group, mean age: eight years and ten months) and 23 children clinically diagnosed with phonological disorders (Study Group, mean age: eight years and eleven months). Additionally, 12 study group children were enrolled in speech therapy (Study Group 1), and 11 were not enrolled in speech therapy (Study Group 2). The subjects were submitted to the following procedures: conventional audiological, auditory brainstem response, auditory middle-latency response, and P300 assessments. All participants presented with normal hearing thresholds. The study group 1 subjects were reassessed after 12 speech therapy sessions, and the study group 2 subjects were reassessed 3 months after the initial assessment. Electrophysiological results were compared between the groups.RESULTS:Latency differences were observed between the groups (the control and study groups) regarding the auditory brainstem response and the P300 tests. Additionally, the P300 responses improved in the study group 1 children after speech therapy.CONCLUSION:The findings suggest that children with phonological disorders have impaired auditory brainstem and cortical region pathways that may benefit from speech therapy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory evoked potentials: predicting speech therapy outcomes in children with phonological disorders

Leite¹,

Wertzner²,

Gonçalves³

et al. 2014

Clinics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Longer latencies in speech‐evoked ABRs also have been observed in learning‐disabled subjects. 1 , 2 , 22 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speech and non-speech processing in children with phonological disorders: an electrophysiological study

Gonçalves

Wertzner

Samelli

et al. 2011

Clinics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE:To determine whether neurophysiological auditory brainstem responses to clicks and repeated speech stimuli differ between typically developing children and children with phonological disorders.INTRODUCTION:Phonological disorders are language impairments resulting from inadequate use of adult phonological language rules and are among the most common speech and language disorders in children (prevalence: 8 ‐ 9%). Our hypothesis is that children with phonological disorders have basic differences in the way that their brains encode acoustic signals at brainstem level when compared to normal counterparts.METHODS:We recorded click and speech evoked auditory brainstem responses in 18 typically developing children (control group) and in 18 children who were clinically diagnosed with phonological disorders (research group). The age range of the children was from 7‐11 years.RESULTS: The research group exhibited significantly longer latency responses to click stimuli (waves I, III and V) and speech stimuli (waves V and A) when compared to the control group.DISCUSSION:These results suggest that the abnormal encoding of speech sounds may be a biological marker of phonological disorders. However, these results cannot define the biological origins of phonological problems. We also observed that speech‐evoked auditory brainstem responses had a higher specificity/sensitivity for identifying phonological disorders than click‐evoked auditory brainstem responses.CONCLUSIONS:Early stages of the auditory pathway processing of an acoustic stimulus are not similar in typically developing children and those with phonological disorders. These findings suggest that there are brainstem auditory pathway abnormalities in children with phonological disorders.

show abstract

“…Studies in typical reading children and adults have demonstrated that the precision with which the auditory brainstem encodes these temporal properties is significantly related to behavioral measures of speech perception (Anderson, Skoe, Chandrasekaran, Zecker, & Kraus, ; Hornickel, Chandrasekaran, Zecker, & Kraus, ; Hornickel, Skoe, Nicol, Zecker, & Kraus, ), phonological processing (White‐Schwoch & Kraus, ), and reading (Hornickel, Anderson, Skoe, Yi, & Kraus, ; Neef, Schaadt, & Friederici, ; Skoe, Brody, & Theodore, ). Accordingly, atypical auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) and frequency following responses (FFRs) have been found in individuals with a broad variety of learning problems (e.g., Cunningham, Nicol, Zecker, Bradlow, & Kraus, ; King et al, ; Purdy et al, ; Wible et al, ; Banai, ; Basu, Krishnan, & Weber‐Fox, ; Malayeri et al, ; for a review, see Banai, Abrams, & Kraus, ). Studies in individuals with exclusive reading‐based learning problems, that is, without comorbid‐specific language impairments or attention deficit disorders, are, however, limited.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subcortical auditory neural synchronization is deficient in pre‐reading children who develop dyslexia

Vos

Vanvooren

Ghesquière

et al. 2020

Developmental Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developmental dyslexia is defined as a learning disability, characterized by severe and persistent difficulties with reading and/or spelling, despite adequate intelligence and instruction (Peterson & Pennington, 2012). To date, it is widely accepted that dyslexia is associated with a specific cognitive deficit in phonological processing, that is, in the representation, storage, and retrieval of speech sounds (Vellutino,

show abstract

Auditory Brainstem Response, Middle Latency Response, and Late Cortical Evoked Potentials in Children with Learning Disabilities

Cited by 102 publications

References 81 publications

Auditory evoked potentials: predicting speech therapy outcomes in children with phonological disorders

Auditory evoked potentials: predicting speech therapy outcomes in children with phonological disorders

Speech and non-speech processing in children with phonological disorders: an electrophysiological study

Subcortical auditory neural synchronization is deficient in pre‐reading children who develop dyslexia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About