Relationship between the correct percentage in SERT and the PTA average on the better ear.

<p>The scatter plot with linear regression prediction line of 95% confidence interval of correct percentage in SERT and the independent variables (i.e.PTA on the better ear, in dB HL).</p

Relationship between the standard scores of PPVT-R and the age at aural habilitation began.

<p>The scatter plot with linear regression prediction line of 95% confidence interval of the standard scores of PPVT-R and the age at aural habilitation began (in months).</p

Summary of previous studies on environmental sound recognition performance by patients who received cochlear implants.

<p>Summary of previous studies on environmental sound recognition performance by patients who received cochlear implants.</p

The mean values (SD) of independent variables of group A (21 preschool children), group B (26 school-aged children) and total participants (n = 47) in this study.

<p>The mean values (SD) of independent variables of group A (21 preschool children), group B (26 school-aged children) and total participants (n = 47) in this study.</p

Figure 1

<p>Relationship between correct percentage in SERT and duration of CI use (a). The scatter plot with linear regression prediction line of 95% confidence interval of the predictive factor (i.e. duration of CI use, in months) of correct percentage in SERT. (<b>b</b>) Estimated mean values of correct percentage in SERT. The scatter plot with a line of estimated mean values of correct percentage on SERT, the horizontal line across subjects in 7 categories of CI duration was 5% derived from children with normal hearing (5–95% range).</p

The correct percentage of 30 sound effects in SERT of CI participants listed according to the sound categories (A, B and C, see text).

<p>The notations “+” and “−” represent the presence or absence of the acoustic features (i.e. temporal pattern and harmonics).</p

The results of SERT and PPVT-R obtained from total participants and subgroups A and B.

<p>The statistical differences (<i>p</i> value) between groups A and B were demonstrated.</p

Demographical background of the prelingually deaf group, the postlingually deaf group and the normal-hearing (NH) group.

<p>IQR: Interquartile range; ImpSide: Side of ear with a implant; OnsetDeaf: Onset of deafness; DuraDeaf: Duration of deafness; AgeImp: Age at implantation; DuraImp: Duration of implant use; SDT: Speech detection threshold; SRT: Speech recognition threshold; ImpPTA: Pure tone average of the implanted ear; NonImpPTA: Pure tone average of the non-implanted or normal-hearing ear; VisionCon: Vision condition.</p><p>Demographical background of the prelingually deaf group, the postlingually deaf group and the normal-hearing (NH) group.</p

Spearman correlation coefficients between deafness-related parameters, test conditions and recognition scores.

<p>OnsetDeaf: Onset of deafness; DuraDeaf: Duration of deafness; AgeImp: Age at implantation; DuraImp: Duration of implant use; n/s: Not significant; n/a: Not applicable.</p><p>*Spearman's correlation coefficients adjusted by sex and age.</p>1<p>Scoring type coded as word  = 1, tone  = 2, phoneme  = 3.</p>2<p>Mode coded as auditory-only  = 1, audiovisual  = 2.</p><p>Only significant correlations are shown.</p><p>Spearman correlation coefficients between deafness-related parameters, test conditions and recognition scores.</p

Objective snoring sound parameters at baseline for the entire study cohort (<i>n</i> = 30).

<p>Values were given as mean (standard error). AHI: apnea-hypopnea index. BMI: body mass index. CI: conference interval; PSG-SI: polysomnography-defined snoring index. SOS: snoring outcomes survey. VAS: visual analogue scale.</p><p>*Statistical analyses were implemented with the Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> test.</p