↓ Skip to main content

Faster phonological processing and right occipito-temporal coupling in deaf adults signal poor cochlear implant outcome

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Faster phonological processing and right occipito-temporal coupling in deaf adults signal poor cochlear implant outcome
Published in
Nature Communications, March 2017
DOI 10.1038/ncomms14872
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diane S. Lazard, Anne-Lise Giraud

Abstract

The outcome of adult cochlear implantation is predicted positively by the involvement of visual cortex in speech processing, and negatively by the cross-modal recruitment of the right temporal cortex during and after deafness. How these two neurofunctional predictors concur to modulate cochlear implant (CI) performance remains unclear. In this fMRI study, we explore the joint involvement of occipital and right hemisphere regions in a visual-based phonological task in post-lingual deafness. Intriguingly, we show that some deaf subjects perform faster than controls. This behavioural effect is associated with reorganized connectivity across bilateral visual, right temporal and left inferior frontal cortices, but with poor CI outcome. Conversely, preserved normal-range reaction times are associated with left-lateralized phonological processing and good CI outcome. These results suggest that following deafness, involvement of visual cortex in the context of reorganized right-lateralized phonological processing compromises its availability for audio-visual synergy during adaptation to CI.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 19%
Researcher 15 19%
Student > Master 13 16%
Other 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 19 24%
Psychology 11 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 9%
Engineering 6 8%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 13 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 August 2017.
All research outputs
#837,613
of 13,115,713 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#9,876
of 22,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,601
of 261,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#546
of 1,099 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,115,713 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,759 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 47.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 261,158 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,099 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.