ReviewSeminars in hearing2018
Electric and Acoustic Stimulation in Cochlear Implant Recipients with Hearing Preservation.
Review in Seminars in hearing, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preclinical evaluation of a hydraulic actuation system with guide tube for robotic cochlear implant electrode insertion.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Article
- State-of-the-Art on the Impact of Bimodal Acoustic Stimulation on Speech Perception in Noise in Adults: A Systematic Review.Audiology research · 2024Review
- Outcomes following cochlear implantation with eluting electrodes: A systematic review.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2024Review
- Treatment following Triple-AAV Delivery in Mature Murine Model of HumanCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2023Article
- Milestones toward cochlear gene therapy for patients with hereditary hearing loss.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2021Review
- Immune Response After Cochlear Implantation.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hearing loss affects 30 million people in the United States, and a subset of these patients have normal low-frequency hearing and ski-sloped high-frequency hearing loss. For these patients, hearing aids alone may not provide adequate benefit. Cochlear implantation alone has been utilized to improve speech perception. The addition of high-frequency electric hearing to low-frequency acoustic hearing in these patients is beneficial. Technical improvements have allowed preservation of low-frequency hearing in cochlear implant recipients, allowing for electric and acoustic stimulation in the same ear with significant improvements in speech perception, sound localization, music appreciation, and quality of life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.