Feldman; Schmidt; Deutsch (1968)19
|
B/2C |
48 |
--- |
--- |
16 |
Reading Dis. |
Third-grade schoolers |
50 sessions; 70min., 3 times a week; 17 weeks |
Top-down and bottom-up; informal
|
Reading and auditory behavioral evaluation |
1- The results have little evidence to back up the hypothesis that an auditory skills development program would favor socially disadvantaged children with reading disorder; 2- The chosen methodology was not effective in answering the hypothesis of the study, since the auditory training program did not have positive effects on the reading skills. |
Wharry; Kirkpatric; Stokes (1987)36
|
B/2C |
27 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
Learning Dis. |
7 - 13 |
20 sessions; 30min., 4 days/week; 5 weeks |
Both not specific |
Auditory Attention Span for Related Syllables (Baker; Leland, 1967)
|
1- Highest post-auditory training scores; 2- Teachers should focus on the listening methods of teaching, more than the visual or the integrative listening-visual ones. |
Bettison et al. (1996)20
|
B/2C |
80 dividedin 40 each with different interventions |
--- |
--- |
--- |
ASD |
3 - 17 |
20 sessions; 2 sessions of 30 min.; 10 days |
Bottom-up; formal
|
Questionnaires |
1- Both groups significantly improved sensitivity to sounds after intervention; 2- Only the control group maintained improvement after 12 months. |
Hayes et al. (2003)10
|
B/2C |
27 |
--- |
15 |
7 |
Learning Dis. |
8 - 12 |
35 to 40 sessions; 60 min/day; 8 weeks |
Top-down; formal
|
Behavioral and electrophysiologic auditory assessment |
1- There was no difference after training, between the groups, in academic and cognitive skills.; 2- Latency of BAEPs click and /da/ there was no difference between pre- and post-training; 3 - Reduction of the P1N1 amplitude and decrease of latency of N2 for /ga/ stimulus in the trained group, where there’s also been increase of P2N2 amplitude. |
Schäffler et al. (2004) - study 1 29
|
B/2C |
140 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
Dyslexia |
7 - 21 |
10 to 15 min./dayineach; 10 days |
Bottom-up; formal
|
Auditory behavioral assessment |
1- 23% of subjects, after auditory training, managed to accomplish all tasks; 2 - Reduction of 20% of subjects with failures in three or more tasks; 3 - The order effect task was carried out with greater difficulty. |
Warrier et al. (2004) - Experiment 2 26
|
B/2C |
13 |
--- |
4 |
7 |
Learning Dis. |
8 - 13 |
35 to 40 sessions; 60 min./day; 8 weeks |
Top-down and bottom-up; formal
|
Behavioral and electrophysiologic auditory assessment |
1- After auditory training, the trained group with correlation below interval (Training-Out) presented increase in latency of N2 (11-17 ms) and better performance of the speech test in the correlation form silence to sound. |
Santos et al. (2007)11
|
B/2C |
10 |
--- |
--- |
10 |
Dyslexia |
9 - 12 |
Daily phonological training; audiovisual training twice a week; 50min.; 6 weeks |
Top-down; formal
|
Behavioral and electrophysiologic auditory assessment and language assessment |
1- Faster and more precise to identify words with modified frequency, without difference to EGnoI after training; 2 - Improvement in the performance of the reading test; 3 - No effect between the groups for the electrophysiologic, but with increase of amplitude (latency bandwidth of 700-1200 ms) after training. |
Joly-Pottuz et al. (2008)21
|
B/2C |
19 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
Dyslexia |
7 - 10 |
Daily phonological training; audiovisual training three times a week; 50 to 70 min.;3 weeks |
Top-down and bottom-up; formal
|
Linguistic assessment |
1- Variables evaluated after phonological auditory training with difference, except for reading of words; 2 - Significantly improved phonological awareness and decoding after training in both groups; 3 - Repetition of words and nonwords, without cumulative evolution. |
Pinheiro; Capellini (2010)27
|
B/2C |
20 |
--- |
--- |
20 |
Learning Dis. |
8 - 14 |
18 sessions; 50 min.; 9 weeks |
Bottom-up; formal
|
Behavioral and electrophysiologic auditory assessment and linguistic assessment |
1- Better performance after intervention in the auditory processing tests; 2 - Better timing of EGnoI for accomplishing behavioral and phonological awareness tests; 3 - Improvement in identifying syllables and phonemic transposing, and total score in the phonemic skills of trained groups. |
Russo et al. (2010)12
|
C/4 |
5 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
TEA |
Average 9.4 |
Sessions not defined, finished when reached 85%; 5 to 10 weeks |
Top-down; formal
|
Electrophysiologic auditory assessment |
1- Four out of five children improved latency figures in BAEPs with speech; 2 - All five children improved in at least one of the variables measured in the cortical speech processing. |
Murphy; Schochat (2011)30
|
B/2C |
12 |
--- |
--- |
18 |
Dyslexia |
7 - 14 |
Sessions not determined; 20 min., 5 times a week; for2 months |
Top-down and bottom-up; formal
|
Behavioral auditory assessment and linguistic assessment |
1- There was significant improvement in the reading of words and phonological awareness tests in both groups; and, in EGnoI alone, in the behavioral auditory assessment; 2 - Significant difference in the scores of behavioral auditory assessment and linguistic assessment after intervention. |
Gray; Miller; Evans (2012)22
|
B/2C |
7 |
--- |
--- |
4 |
ADHD |
12 - 40TGwI = 7EGnoI = 31 |
900 trails/day; 60 to 120 min./day; 4 consecutive days |
Bottom-up; formal
|
Behavioral auditory assessment |
1- Significant improvement in identifying auditory stimuli in face of contralateral masking; 2 - The number of false alarms and thresholds, between groups, was not significant; however, EGnoI decreased by half the number of false alarms after intervention. |
Filippini; Befi-Lopes; Schochat (2012)13
|
B/2C |
23 |
--- |
--- |
7 |
SLI (n= 14) CAPD (n=9) |
7 - 13 |
8 sessions; 50 min.; 8 weeks |
Bottom-up; formal
|
Behavioral and electrophysiologic auditory assessment |
1- In reevaluation, groups that received intervention presented significant improvement in temporal order skills; 2 - BAEPs with speech, in silence, there was no significant difference in neither of the groups. BAEPs of speech with ipsilateral noise influenced amplitude and latency values negatively; however, the trained groups presented better responses in reevaluation. |
Vatanabe et al. (2014)28
|
B/2C |
10 |
--- |
--- |
10 |
Reading Dis. |
8 |
8 sessions; 40 min.; 8 weeks |
Top-down and bottom-up; formal
|
Behavioral auditory assessment and linguistic assessment |
1- Significant improvement of TGwI in reevaluation in all behavioral auditory assessments; 2 - In the CONFIAS (Portuguese abbreviation for phonological awareness sequential evaluation instrument) test, all tasks were significantly improved in their scores in reevaluation, in both groups. |
Fisher et al. (2015)23
|
B/2B |
43 |
43 |
--- |
--- |
Schizophrenia |
14 - 30 |
Sessions not determined; 40 h (1h/day, 5 days/week). 8 weeks |
Top-down; formal
|
Comparison between initial starting point and after 20h of training using auditory processing speed - psychophysical threshold under a moderate perceptual challenge |
1- Significant interaction of the time and treatment condition for global cognition, verbal memory and problem-solving and a difference in the level of tendency in visual learning; 2 - In TGwI, advancing the initial reward was significantly associated with the gains in global cognition and verbal memory, whereas these associations were not significant in CGwI; 3 - Individuals auditorily trained became more efficient in the fast processing of successive auditory stimuli; this improvement was significantly associated with the gains in global cognition. |
Kozou et al. (2018)24
|
B/2C |
30 |
--- |
--- |
30 |
ASD |
7 - 12 |
2 sessions a week, 30 min. each; 6 weeks |
Bottom-up; formal
|
Behavioral auditory assessment and language assessment |
1- Auditory skills of ASD children range from completely normal to substantially defective, especially in the dichotic test, and usually lower than those of children with typical development; 2 - ASD group with phonological awareness skills inferior to the group with typical development; 3 - Auditory training in children with ASD was beneficial to improve difficulty in dichotic hearing, as well as other not trained fields of language and auditory processing skills. |