ArticleScientific reports2021
A novel cochlear measurement that predicts inner-ear malformation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cochlear duct length variability in prelingual sensorineural hearing loss: Emphasis on Waardenburg syndrome and implications for 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 · 2026Article
- Predictive Value of 3D Radiological Segmentation and Anatomical Parameters for Cochlear Implantation Electrode Insertion Depth Based on a Large Sample of Patients with Inner Ear Malformations.Journal of otology · 2025Article
- Clinical Validation of Manual Measurement of Cochlea Length With Post-Operative Electrode Insertion Depth: A Pilot Study.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Cochlear Implantation: Small Cochlear Diameter May Indicate Degree of Abnormality.The journal of international advanced otology · 2024Article
- Validation of Automatic Cochlear Measurements Using OTOPLANJournal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Cochlear Implantation in Pediatrics: The Effect of Cochlear Coverage.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Method to estimate the basal turn length in inner ear malformation types.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The Cochlear Size Variations in Incomplete Partitions with Multiplanar Images on Pediatric Temporal Bone CT.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2023Article
- A novel three-step process for the identification of inner ear malformation types.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2022Article
- Analysis of Cochlear Parameters in Paediatric Inner Ears with Enlarged Vestibular Aqueduct and Patent Cochlea.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- A novel method of identifying inner ear malformation types by pattern recognition in the mid modiolar section.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The A-value used in cochlear duct length (CDL) estimation does not take malformed cochleae into consideration. The objective was to determine the A-value reported in the literature, to assess the accuracy of the A-value measurement and to evaluate a novel cochlear measurement in distinguishing malformed cochlea. High resolution Computer Tomography images in the oblique coronal plane/cochlear view of 74 human temporal bones were analyzed. The A-value and novel C-value measurement were evaluated as predictors of inner ear malformation type. The proximity of the facial nerve to the basal turn was evaluated subjectively. 26 publications report on the A-value; but they do not distinguish normal vs. malformed cochleae. The A-values of the normal cochleae compared to the cochleae with cochlear hypoplasia, incomplete partition (IP) type I, -type II, and -type III were significantly different. The A-value does not predict the C-value. The C-values of the normal cochleae compared to the cochleae with IP type I and IP type III were significantly different. The proximity of the facial nerve to the basal turn did not relate to the type of malformation. The A-value is different in normal vs. malformed cochleae. The novel C-value could be used to predict malformed anatomy, although it does not distinguish all malformation types.
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.