THE POSITION STATEMENT The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) endorses early detection of and intervention for infants with hearing loss. The goal of early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) is to maximize linguistic competence and literacy development for children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Without appropriate opportunities to learn language, these children will fall behind their hearing peers in communication, cognition, reading, and social-emotional development. Such delays may result in lower educational and employment levels in adulthood.1 To maximize the outcome for infants who are deaf or hard of hearing, the hearing of all infants should be screened at no later than 1 month of age. Those who do not pass screening should have a comprehensive audiological evaluation at no later than 3 months of age. Infants with confirmed hearing loss should receive appropriate intervention at no later than 6 months of age from health care and education professionals with expertise in hearing loss and deafness in infants and young children. Regardless of previous hearing-screening outcomes, all infants with or without risk factors should receive ongoing surveillance of communicative development beginning at 2 months of age during well-child visits in the medical home.2 EHDI systems should guarantee seamless transitions for infants and their families through this process.

/pdf/year-2007-position-statement-principles-and-guidelines-for-1m07julcke.pdf

Year 2007 position statement: Principles and guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention programs

The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) endorses early detection of, and intervention for infants with hearing loss (early hearing detection and intervention, [EHDI]) through integrated, interdisciplinary state and national systems of universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS), evaluation, and family-centered intervention. The goal of EHDI is to maximize linguistic and communicative competence and literacy development for children who are hard of hearing or deaf. Without appropriate opportunities to learn language, children who are hard of hearing or deaf will fall behind their hearing peers in language, cognition, and social-emotional development. Such delays may result in lower educational and employment levels in adulthood (Gallaudet University Center for Assessment and Demographic Study, 1998). Thus, all infants' hearing should be screened using objective, physiologic measures to identify those with congenital or neonatal onset hearing loss. Audiologic evaluation and medical evaluations should be in progress before 3 months of age. Infants with confirmed hearing loss should receive intervention before 6 months of age from health care and education professionals with expertise in hearing loss and deafness in infants and young children. Regardless of prior hearing screening outcomes, all infants who demonstrate risk indicators for delayed onset or progressive hearing loss should receive ongoing audiologic and medical monitoring for 3 years and at appropriate intervals thereafter to ensure prompt identification and intervention (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association [ASHA], 1997). EHDI systems should guarantee seamless transitions for infants and their families through this process.

Appropriate early intervention programs are family-centered, interdisciplinary, culturally competent, and build on informed choice for families (Baker-Hawkins and Easterbrooks, 1994). To achieve informed decision-making, families should have access to professional, educational, and consumer organizations; and they should have opportunities to interact with adults and children who are hard of hearing and deaf (Ogden, 1996; Thompson, 1994). Families should have access to general information on …

/pdf/year-2000-position-statement-principles-and-guidelines-for-3g4wba15sj.pdf

Year 2000 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(11)61143-4.pdf

Mental health of deaf people

Profound hearing loss in childhood has far-reaching consequences for children and their families. Recent interdisciplinary developments such as cochlear implants are transforming outcomes and offering many more opportunities for deaf children.

/pdf/profound-deafness-in-childhood-4hupem599w.pdf

Profound Deafness in Childhood

The relation between reading ability and phonological coding and awareness (PCA) skills in individuals who are severely and profoundly deaf was investigated with a meta-analysis. From an initial set of 230 relevant publications, 57 studies were analyzed that experimentally tested PCA skills in 2,078 deaf participants. Half of the studies found statistically significant evidence for PCA skills and half did not. A subset of 25 studies also tested reading proficiency and showed a wide range of effect sizes. Overall PCA skills predicted 11% of the variance in reading proficiency in the deaf participants. Other possible modulating factors, such as task type and reading grade level, did not explain the remaining variance. In 7 studies where it was measured, language ability predicted 35% of the variance in reading proficiency. These meta-analytic results indicate that PCA skills are a low to moderate predictor of reading achievement in deaf individuals and that other factors, most notably language ability, have a greater influence on reading development, as has been found to be the case in the hearing population.

/pdf/reading-achievement-in-relation-to-phonological-coding-and-2xib3d2fpi.pdf

Reading Achievement in Relation to Phonological Coding and Awareness in Deaf Readers: A Meta-analysis

This article presents a rich context of information for interpreting Stanford Achievement Test scores and for describing the achievement of deaf and hard-of-hearing students The publisher's national norming of the Stanford Achievement Test provides a context of actual performance of hearing students The publisher's Performance Standards provide a context of expectations for hearing students as determined by a panel of experts The Gallaudet Research Institute's norming of the test on a national sample of deaf and hard-of-hearing students provides a context of test performance by this special population A smaller subsample of the deaf and hard-of-hearing students who take the same test levels as hearing students provides an additional reference group with respect to the Performance Standards Information from these sources is brought together into two graphical contexts to address these questions: Can the normative data from the publisher's national standardization of the test with hearing students, and the normative data from the GRI's national norming of the test with deaf and hard-of-hearing students provide a useful context for the interpretation of individual test scores? Can they provide a useful way to examine achievement of groups of students? Can the new Performance Standards defined by the test publisher offer a useful context for test score interpretation for high-achieving deaf and hard-of-hearing students?

/pdf/the-stanford-achievement-test-9th-edition-national-norming-i43gbe3sxf.pdf

Carol Bloomquist Traxler

Papers

The Stanford Achievement Test, 9th Edition: National Norming and Performance Standards for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students