Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32767167›Full record

ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2021

Is the spread of excitation width correlated to the speech recognition in cochlear implant users?

Juliana Coutinho da Silva, Maria Valéria Schmidt Goffi-Gomez, Ana Tereza Magalhães, Robinson Koji Tsuji, Ricardo Ferreira Bento

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Clinical Applications for Spread of Excitation Functions Obtained Via Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potentials (eCAP).Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2024
    Article
  3. Is the spread of excitation different between adults and children cochlear implants users?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 · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Juliana Coutinho da SilvaCochlear Implant Group, Clinical Hospital of the Medical School, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Maria Valéria Schmidt Goffi-GomezCochlear Implant Group, Clinical Hospital of the Medical School, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. valeria.goffi@hc.fm.usp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4440-7692
Ana Tereza MagalhãesCochlear Implant Group, Clinical Hospital of the Medical School, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Robinson Koji TsujiCochlear Implant Group, Clinical Hospital of the Medical School, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ricardo Ferreira BentoCochlear Implant Group, Clinical Hospital of the Medical School, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess whether there is an interference of the spread of excitation (SOE) on speech recognition.

methodsRetrospective cross-sectional study, approved by the institution's ethics committee (CAAE03409212.8.0000.0068). Adult patients with intraoperative neural response telemetry (NRT) performed on electrodes 6, 11 and 16 implanted with Cochlear Ltd (Sydney, Australia) devices were selected. Patients with partial array insertion, pre-lingual hearing loss, deafness etiology due to and CI experience less than 12 months were excluded. SOE was recorded at 10 current units above the NRT threshold (tNRT) and its width in millimeters was collected at point 0.75 of the function. Speech recognition test was 25-recorded monosyllables list, presented at 65 dBHL at 0° azimuth in a sound treated booth. The analysis was divided into groups by electrode array type, regarding the tNRT, SOE width, SOE's peak amplitude and electrode peak.

resultsA 126 SOE measurements of the 3 tested electrodes were obtained from 43 patients. Patients with straight array had significantly wider SOE, greater peak amplitude at electrode 6 and higher tNRTs. In the perimodiolar array, there was a negative correlation between SOE and monosyllables recognition at electrodes 6 and 11, and in the combined average of the three electrodes, with a significant difference in electrode 11. Sixty-six percent of the SOE measurements had their peak shifted to adjacent electrodes.

conclusionIt was observed, in perimodiolar array, the greater the dispersion of electrical current, the worse the speech recognition, especially in the medial electrode.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsDeafnessSpeech PerceptionAdultAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesElectrodes, ImplantedHumansRetrospective StudiesChannel interactionCochlear implantSpectral resolutionSpeech recognitionSpread of excitation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.