Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34195373›Full record

ReviewLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2021

Early pediatric Cochlear implantation: An update.

Akash N Naik, Varun V Varadarajan, Prashant S Malhotra

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Postoperative Plain Radiographic Evaluation of Electrode Placement After Cochlear Implantation: An Observational Study From India.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025
    Article
  7. The Relationship Between Daily Device Use and Subjective Hearing Abilities in Pediatric Cochlear Implant Users.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. [Perception of Mandarin aspirated/unaspirated consonants in children with cochlear implants].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Changes in Revision Cochlear Implantation and Device Failure Profiles.Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology · 2024
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Akash N NaikDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery The Ohio State University Columbus Ohio USA.
Varun V VaradarajanDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery The Ohio State University Columbus Ohio USA.
Prashant S MalhotraDivision of Pediatric Otolaryngology Nationwide Children's Hospital Columbus Ohio USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8690-2800
The Ohio State University · USNationwide Children's Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The criteria and candidacy for pediatric cochlear implantation (CI) has significantly transformed over the past few decades and continues to evolve with technological advancements, and recognition of benefit in more diverse populations. Prolonged auditory deprivation among patients with profound sensorineural hearing loss has been shown to cause widespread degeneration in the central auditory system. Thus, there is increasing evidence advocating for earlier implantation within a critical neuroplastic window. However, there is a lack of consensus on this optimal age of implantation. Historically, there were concerns regarding surgical feasibility and safety, anesthesia risk, and logistical considerations in very young infants <12 months. Recent literature has investigated surgical safety and anesthesia risk as well speech and language outcomes with early implantation, resulting in the long-awaited reduction in approved age by the FDA (<9 months for certain devices). This article reviews logistical considerations, surgical safety, anesthesia risk, and language developmental outcomes associated with early CI (<12 months).

Indexed as

anesthesia riskinfantlanguage and speech developmentpediatric cochlear implantationsurgical safety

Identifiers

PMID34195373
PMCPMC8223461
OpenAlexW3161224886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.