Table 3. Characteristic differences between those with and without language underperformance.

	Language underperformance N=61	Commensurate language N=88	p-value
Receptive language to NVIQ ratio	0.70 (12.9)	1.03 (0.17)	---
Age at study in months	50.2 (17.9)	45.1 (19.5)	0.10
Sex– Male	33 (54.1%)	52 (59.1%)	0.54
Race
Caucasian	43 (72.9%)	74 (86.1%)
African American	12 (20.3%)	10 (11.6%)	0.049*
Asian	3 (5.1%)	0
Other	1 (1.7%)	2 (2.3%)
Premature	8 (13.1%)	21 (23.9%)	0.14
Mother education college or greater	27 (44.3%)	59 (67.1%)	0.006
Public insurance only	31 (50.8%)	20 (22.7%)	0.0004
Socioeconomic status*
1 (Lowest)	23 (38.3%)	15 (17.7%)
2	13 (21.7%)	20 (23.5%)	0.006
3	13 (21.7%)	13 (15.3%)
4 (highest)	11 (18.3%)	37 (43.5%)
unknown	1	3
Age at HL identification in months	10.0 (12.4) Median 2.5	10.4 (12.4) Median 5.0	0.28*
Degree of hearing loss
Mild	4 (6.6%)	16 (18.2%)
Moderate	18 (29.5%)	44 (50%)	0.0008
Severe	14 (23%)	14 (15.9%)
Profound	25 (41%)	14 (15.9%)
Has cochlear implant	32 (52.5%)	22 (25%)	0.0006
Age at cochlear implant	29.1 (16.8)	22.0 (10.1)	0.06
Duration with implant	28.0 (14.5)	23.7 (20.1)	0.37
NVIQ	99.4 (20.4)	92.8 (19.7)	0.048
Language
Receptive standard score	72.9 (15.9)	93.4 (16.0)	<.0001
Expressive standard score	73.1 (16.6)	93.3 (15.8)	<.0001
Currently enrolled in speech-language therapy	49 (80.3%)	60 (70.6%)	0.18

^*p-value from Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test