Socioeconomic Status and Reading Disability: Neuroanatomy and Plasticity in Response to Intervention.

Although reading disability (RD) and socioeconomic status (SES) are independently associated with variation in reading ability and brain structure/function, the joint influence of SES and RD on neuroanatomy and/or response to intervention is unknown. In total, 65 children with RD (ages 6-9) with diverse SES were assigned to an intensive, 6-week summer reading intervention (n = 40) or to a waiting-list control group (n = 25). Before and after, all children completed standardized reading assessments and magnetic resonance imaging to measure cortical thickness. At baseline, higher SES correlated with greater vocabulary and greater cortical thickness in bilateral perisylvian and supramarginal regions-especially in left pars opercularis. Within the intervention group, lower SES was associated with both greater reading improvement and greater cortical thickening across broad, bilateral occipitotemporal and temporoparietal regions following the intervention. Additionally, treatment responders (n = 20), compared with treatment nonresponders (n = 19), exhibited significantly greater cortical thickening within similar regions. The waiting control and nonresponder groups exhibited developmentally typical, nonsignificant cortical thinning during this time period. These findings indicate that effective summer reading intervention is coupled with cortical growth, and is especially beneficial for children with RD who come from lower-SES home environments.

Digits-in-Noise Test as an Assessment Tool for Hearing Loss and Hearing Aids.

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between an American English Digits in Noise (DIN) test and commonly used audiological measures to evaluate the DIN test's ability to detect hearing loss and validate hearing aid fitting. QuickSIN and DIN tests were completed by participants with untreated hearing loss (n = 46), prescription hearing aids (n = 15), and over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids (n = 12). Performance on the QuickSIN showed moderate positive correlations with DIN for untreated hearing loss participants and prescription hearing aid users, but not for OTC hearing aid users. For untreated hearing loss participants, both QuickSIN and DIN tests showed positive moderate to strong correlations with high frequency puretone averages. In OTC users, DIN scores did not significantly change over a 6-month time period and were better when conducted remotely compared to in-person testing. Our results suggest that the DIN test may be a feasible monitoring option for individuals with hearing loss and those fitted with hearing aids. However, due to small sample size in this pilot study, future research is needed to examine DIN test's utility for fitting and validating OTC hearing aids.