Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31290802›Full record

ArticleOtology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology2019

Validating a New Tablet-based Tool in the Determination of Cochlear Implant Angular Insertion Depth.

Michael W Canfarotta, Margaret T Dillon, Emily Buss, Harold C Pillsbury, Kevin D Brown, Brendan P O'Connell

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Angular Insertion Depth for Cochlear Implantation: A Comparative Analysis on Precision of CT, MRI, and x-Ray.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Prediction accuracy of cochlear implant electrode insertion using the OTOPLAN software.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Anatomy-Based Fitting in Cochlear Implants: Potential for Optimizing Postoperative Outcomes: A Pilot Study.Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2025
    Article
  8. Influence of cochlear coverage on speech perception in single sided deafness, bimodal, and bilateral implanted cochlear implant patients.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  9. Surgical Experience in Pre-Operative Measurement of Cochlear Duct Length in Cochlear Implant Surgery.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Speech Recognition and Subjective Hearing Abilities for Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Users With Unilateral Hearing Loss.Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Association between lateral wall electrode array insertion parameters and audiological outcomes in bilateral cochlear implantation.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
    Article
  18. Validation of Automatic Cochlear Measurements Using OTOPLANJournal of personalized medicine · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Michael W CanfarottaDepartment of Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Margaret T Dillon
Emily Buss
Harold C Pillsbury
Kevin D Brown
Brendan P O'Connell

Funding

Research Training in OtolaryngologyT32DC005360 · NIDCD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI MANIS, PAUL B · 2003 to 2023
$2.8M
NIDCD NIH HHS T32 DC005360
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study is to determine the reliability of a new tablet-based software that utilizes postoperative computed tomography to determine angular insertion depth (AID), cochlear duct length (CDL), and the cochlear place frequency of individual electrodes in cochlear implant recipients. PATIENTS: Twenty adult cochlear implant recipients with lateral-wall electrode arrays of varying lengths were included in the study.

interventionCochlear and electrode array measurements were made by 2 otolaryngologists using a tablet-based software. The user manually identifies the modiolus, round window, and each electrode contact to calculate AID. The user also manually identifies cochlear landmarks to calculate the CDL. The AID and CDL are applied to the Greenwood function to obtain an estimate of the cochlear place frequency for each electrode. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome measure was the reliability of the instrument, as assessed with intra and interrater reliability of measured AID and CDL. The resultant differences in the estimated cochlear place frequency of the most apical electrode were also evaluated.

resultsA broad range of AIDs were observed (390°-659°). Intraclass correlation coefficients for intra (0.991) and interrater reliability (0.980) of AID of the most apical electrode contact were excellent. Intra (0.820) and interrater reliability (0.784) of CDL were also excellent. The estimated cochlear place frequency for the most apical electrode differed by an average of 6.7% (0-18.7%) across the 2 raters.

conclusionThere is excellent agreement amongst clinicians in the determination of AID and CDL, resulting in small changes in estimated cochlear place frequency of the most apical electrode using this new software.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsComputers, HandheldSoftwareAdultFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID31290802
PMCPMC6697191

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.