Effects of different types of auditory temporal training on language
skills: a systematic review

Murphy, Cristina Ferraz Borges; Schochat, Eliane

doi:10.6061/clinics/2013(10)12

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

REVIEW • Clinics 68 (10) • Oct 2013 • https://doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2013(10)12 copy

Effects of different types of auditory temporal training on language skills: a systematic review

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Previous studies have investigated the effects of auditory temporal training on language disorders. Recently, the effects of new approaches, such as musical training and the use of software, have also been considered. To investigate the effects of different auditory temporal training approaches on language skills, we reviewed the available literature on musical training, the use of software and formal auditory training by searching the SciELO, MEDLINE, LILACS-BIREME and EMBASE databases. Study Design: Systematic review. Results: Using evidence levels I and II as the criteria, 29 of the 523 papers found were deemed relevant to one of the topics (use of software - 13 papers; formal auditory training - six papers; and musical training - 10 papers). Of the three approaches, studies that investigated the use of software and musical training had the highest levels of evidence; however, these studies also raised concerns about the hypothesized relationship between auditory temporal processing and language. Future studies are necessary to investigate the actual contribution of these three types of auditory temporal training to language skills.

Training; Hearing; Language, Music; Software

Level	DESCRIPTION
Ia	Well-designed meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Ib	Well-designed randomized controlled trials
IIa	Well-designed controlled studies without randomization
IIb	Well-designed quasi-experimental studies
III	Well-designed non-experimental studies, i.e., correlational and case studies
IV	Expert committee reports, consensus conferences and clinical experiences of respected authorities

Study	Evidence Level		Participants		Age	Improvement of ATP after training?	Improvement of language skills after training?
		SG	AG	CG
Tallal et al. (⁵5. Tallal P, Miller SL, Bedi G, Byma G, Wang X, Nagarajan SS, et al. Language comprehension in language-learning impaired children improved with acoustically modified speech. Science. 1996;271(5245):81-4.)	II	11 Lang D (FFW)	11 Lang. D (software with natural speech)	______	5 to 10	Yes, higher for SG	Yes, higher for SG
Cohen et al. (⁶6. Cohen W, Hodson A, O'Hare A, Boyle J, Durrani T, McCartney E, et al. Effects of computer-based intervention through acoustically modified speech (Fast ForWord) in severe mixed receptive-expres-sive language impairment: outcomes from a randomized controlled trial. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2005;48(3):715-29.)	Ib	23 Lang.D (FFW)	1 group of 27 Lang. D (another software)	1 group of 27 Lang. D	6 to 10	Not tested	Yes, for all 3 trained groups
Gillam et al. (⁷7. Gillam RB, Loeb DF, Hoffman LM, Bohman T, Champlin CA, Thibodeau L, et al. The efficacy of Fast ForWord Language intervention in school-age children with language impairment: a randomized controlled trial. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008;51(1):97-119.)	Ib	54 Lang. D (FFW)	3 groups of 54 Lang. D each (another software)	_______	6 to 8	Yes, for all trained groups	Yes, for all 4 trained groups
Given et al. (⁸8. Given BK, Wasserman JD, Chari SA, Beattie K, Eden GF. A randomized, controlled study of computer-based intervention in middle school struggling readers. Brain Lang. 2008;106(2):83-97.)	Ib	12 Lang. D (FFW)	3 groups of 14, 15 e 11 Lang. D each (another software)	1 group of 13 Lang. D	12	Not tested	Yes, for all 4 trained groups
Pinheiro & Capellini (⁹9. Pinheiro FH, Capellini SA. Auditory training in students with learning disabilities. Pro Fono. 2010;22(1):49-54.)	II	10 Learn. D (AudioTraining) e 10 TD (AudioTraining)	_____	10 Learn. D e 10 TD	8 to 14	Not tested	Yes, only for SG
Murphy & Schochat (¹⁰10. Murphy CFB, Schochat E. Effect of non-linguistic auditory training on phonological and reading skills. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2011;63(3):147-53.)	II	Study 1-12 D (Software ATP)	Study 2-18D (language training)	Study 1-28 D	7 to 14	Study 1 - Yes, only for SG	Study 1 - Yes, only for SG
		Study 2-18 D (Software ATP)				Study 2 - Yes, only for SG	Estudo 2 - Yes, only for SG
Halliday et al. (¹¹11. Halliday LF, Taylor JL, Millward KE, Moore DR Lack of generalization of auditory learning in typically developing children. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012;55(1):168-81.)	II	22 TD (non-verbal discrimination/Software STAR)	2 groups of 22 TD (verbal discrimination) and 20 TD (visual discrimination)	1 group of 22 TD	8 to 10	Yes, only for SG and one of the AG	No improvement
Heim et al. (¹²12. Heim S, Keil A, Choudhury N, Thomas Friedman J, Benasich AA. Early gamma oscillations during rapid auditory processing in children with a language-learning impairment: Changes in neural mass activity after training. Neuropsychol. 2013;24;51(5):990-1001.)	II	21 Lang D (FFW)	______	1 group of 12 TD	8 (mean age)	Yes, only for SG	Yes, only for SG
Fisher et al. (¹³13. Fisher M, Holland C, Merzenich MM, Vinogradov S. Using neuroplasticity-based auditory training to improve verbal memory in schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry. 2009;166(7):805-11.)	II	29 schizophrenia (based on the FFW)	1 group of 26 schizophrenia (visualspacial game, pinball-style game)	________	45 (SG) and 48 (AG)	Yes, only for SG	Yes, only for SG
Gaab et al. (¹⁴14. Gaab N, Gabrieli JD, Deutsch GK, Tallal P, Temple E. Neural correlates of rapid auditory processing are disrupted in children with developmental dyslexia and ameliorated with training: an fMRI study. Restor Neurol Neurosci. 2007;25(3-4):295-310.)	II	22 D (FFW)	______	1 group of 23 TD	10 (mean age)	No	Yes, only for SG
Russo et al. (¹⁵15. Russo NM, Nicol TG, Zecker SG, Hayes EA, Kraus N. Auditory training improves neural timing in the human brainstem. Behav Brain Res. 2005; 156(1):95-103.)	II	9 Lear. D. (Earobics)	_______	1 group of 10 TD and Lear. D.	8 to 12	Yes, only for SG	Yes, only for SG
Strehlow et al. (¹⁶16. Strehlow U, Haffner J, Bischof J, Gratzka V, Parzer P, Resch F. Does successful training of temporal processing of sound and phoneme stimuli improve reading and spelling? Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2006;15(1):19-29.)	II	15 D (sound processing training and reading)	14 D (phoneme processing and reading) and 15 D (reading)	____	7 to 8	Yes, for all but higher for sound processing group after 6 or 12 months later	Yes, for all groups after 12 months later
Hayes et al. (¹⁷17. Hayes EA, Warrier CM, Nicol TG, Zecker SG, Kraus N. Neural plasticity following auditory training in children with learning problems. Clin Neurophysiol. 2003;114(4):673-84.)	II	27 Learn. D (Earobics)	______	15 learn. D. and 7 TD	8 to 12	Yes, higher for SD	Yes, for some measures in SG

Study	Evidence Level		Participants		Age	Improvement of ATP after training?	Improvement of language skills after training?
		SG	AG	CG
Megale et al. (¹⁸18. Megale RL, Iorio MC, Schochat E. Auditory training: assessment of the benefit of hearing aid in elderly individuals. Pro Fono. 2010;22(2):101-6.)	II	16 HAU	_____	13 HAU	60 to 90	Not tested	Yes, qualitative improvement only for SG
Gil & Iório (¹⁹19. Gil D, Iorio MC. Formal auditory training in adult hearing aid users. Clinics. 2010;65(2):165-74.)	II	7 HAU	_____	7 HAU	16 to 60	Yes, reduction of P3 latency only for SG	Yes, qualitative improvement only for SG
Filippini et al. (²⁰20. Filippini R, Beffi-Lopes DM, Schochat E Efficacy of auditory training using the ABR to complex sounds: Auditory Processing Disorder and Specific Language Impairment. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2012;64(5):217-26.)	II	9 APD and 6 Lang. D	_____	7 TD and 8 Lang. D.	7 to 12	Yes, only for trained groups	Not tested
Vilela et al. (²¹21. Vilela N, Wertzner HF, Sanches SGG, Neves-Lobo IF, Carvallo RMM. Processamento temporal de crianças com transtorno fonológico submetidas ao treino auditivo: estudo piloto. J. Soc. Bras. Fonoaudiol. 2012;24(1):42-8.)	Ib	5 PD	5 PD (informal training)	5 PD	7 to 10	no significant differences before and after training for all groups	Not tested
Miranda et al. (²²22. Miranda EC, Gil D, Iório MC. Formal auditory training in elderly hearing aid users. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2008;74(6):919-25.)	II	6 HAU	______	7 HAU	60 to 74	Yes, for SG	Not tested
Schochat et al. (²³23. Schochat E, Musiek FE, Alonso R, Ogata J. Effect of auditory training on the middle latency response in children with (central) auditory processing disorder. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2010;43(8):777-85.)	II	30 APD		23 TD	8 to 14	Yes, for SG	Not tested

Study	Evidence Level	Participants			Age	Improvement of ATP after training?	Improvement of language skills after training?
		SG	AG	CG
Overy et al. (²⁴24. Overy K. Dyslexia and music. From timing deficits to musical intervention. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2003;999:497-505.)	II	9 D	________	15 weeks of SG before musical training	8,8 (average)	Yes, after training	Yes (phonological skills only after training)
Degé & Schwarzer (²⁵25. Dege F, Schwarzer G. The effect of a music program on phonological awareness in preschoolers. Front Psychol. 2011;2:124.)	II	13 TD	14 (phonological training) e 14 (sports training)	_____	5 to 6	Not tested	Yes (phonological awareness in SG and phonological AG)
Gerry et al. (²⁶26. Gerry D, Unrau A, Trainor LJ. Active music in infancy enhance musical, communicative and social development. Dev Sci. 2012;15(3):398-407.)	Ib	20 TD active musical training	14 TD (passive musical training)	26 TD	6 months (average)	Improvement of musical discrimination	Yes (gestures in SG)
Moreno & Besson (²⁷27. Moreno S, Besson M. Musical training and language-related brain electrical activity in children. Psychophysiol. 2006;43:287-291.)	II	10 TD	10 TD (training in painting)	8 TD	8y (average)	Yes, electrophysiological tests	Not tested
Yucel et al. (²⁸28. Yucel E, Sennaroglu G, Belgin E. The family oriented musical training for children with cochlear implants: speech and musical perception results of two year follow-up. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;73(7):1043-52.)	II	9 CI	_______	9 CI	8 months to 8 years	Yes, greater for SG	Yes (greater for SG)
Moreno et al. (²⁹29. Moreno S, Marques C, Santos A, Santos M, Castro SL, Besson M. Musical training influences linguistic abilities in 8-year-old children: more evidence for brain plasticity. Cereb Cortex. 2009;19(3):712-23.)	II	16 TD (musical training)	16 TD (painting training)	_____	8,4 (average)	Yes, for SD	Yes, for SD
Chobert et al. (³⁰30. Chobert J, François C, Velay JL, Besson M. Twelve Months of Active Musical Training in 8- to 10-Year-Old Children Enhances the Preattentive Processing of Syllabic Duration and Voice Onset Time. Cereb Cortex. 2012 Dec 12. [Epub ahead of print].)	II	12 TD (musical training)	12 TD (painting training)	______	8 (average)	Yes, for SG	Not tested
Bolduc (³¹31. Bolduc J. Effect of a music programme on kindergartners's phonological awareness skills 1. International Journal of Music Education. 2009;27(1):37-47.)	II	51 TD (Standley and Hughes music training programme)	53 TD (government music program)	_______	5 (average)	Yes, for both groups	Yes, higher for SG
Fujioka et al. (³²32. Fujioka T, Ross B, Kakigi R, Pantev C, Trainor LJ. One year of musical training affects development of auditory cortical-evoked fields in young children. Brain. 2006;129(Pt 10):2593-608.)	II	6 TD (Suzuki music school)	______	6 TD	4 to 6	Yes, for SG	Not tested
Gromko (³³33. Gromko J. The effect of music instruction on phonemic awareness in beginning readers. Journal of Research in Music Education. 2005; 53(3):199.)	II	43 TD (music education)	________	60 TD	kindergarten	Not tested	Yes, higher for SG

Faculdade de Medicina / USP Rua Dr Ovídio Pires de Campos, 225 - 6 and., 05403-010 São Paulo SP - Brazil, Tel.: (55 11) 2661-6235 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: clinics@hc.fm.usp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Murphy CF and Schochat E collected the data and wrote the manuscript.