Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25899551›Full record

ArticleOtology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology2015

Cochlear Implantation in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Adrien A Eshraghi, Ronen Nazarian, Fred F Telischi, Diane Martinez, Annelle Hodges, Sandra Velandia, Ivette Cejas-Cruz, Thomas J Balkany, Kaming Lo, Dustin Lang

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. When May Cochlear Implant Not Work Even at a Very Young Age?International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Adrien A EshraghiDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, U.S.A.
Ronen Nazarian
Fred F Telischi
Diane Martinez
Annelle Hodges
Sandra Velandia
Ivette Cejas-Cruz
Thomas J Balkany
Kaming Lo
Dustin Lang
University of Miami · USBionics Institute · AUCochlear (Australia) · AUMED-EL (Austria) · AT

Funding

Miami Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000460 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI SACCO, RALPH L. · 2012 to 2016
$16.9M
NCATS NIH HHS 1UL1TR000460NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000460
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the outcome of cochlear implantation in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). STUDY

designRetrospective case review and survey.

settingTertiary referral center. PATIENTS: Children who meet criteria for cochlear implantation and diagnosis of ASD.

main outcome measuresReceptive and expressive language scores and parental survey data.

resultsFifteen patients with history of ASD and cochlear implantation were analyzed and compared with 15 patients who received cochlear implant and have no other disability. Postoperatively, more than 67% of children with ASD significantly improved their speech perception skills, and 60% significantly improved their speech expression skills, whereas all patients in the control group showed significant improvement in both aspects. The top 3 reported improvements after cochlear implantation were name recognition, response to verbal requests, and enjoyment of music. Of all behavioral aspects, the use of eye contact was the least improved. Survey results in regard to improvements in patient interaction were more subtle when compared with those related to sound and speech perception. The most improved aspects in the ASD patients' lives after cochlear implantation seemed to be attending to other people's requests and conforming to family routines. Of note, awareness of the child's environment is the most highly ranked improvement attributed to the cochlear implant.

conclusionCochlear implants are effective and beneficial for hearing impaired members of the ASD population, although development of language may lag behind that of implanted children with no additional disabilities. Significant speech perception and overall behavior improvement are noted.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationLanguage DevelopmentAdolescentAutism Spectrum DisorderChildChild, PreschoolCochlear ImplantsFemaleHearing LossHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesSpeech Perception

Identifiers

PMID25899551
PMCPMC4537326
OpenAlexW1998557862

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.