ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021
The Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation in Usher Syndrome: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cochlear Implantation in Down Syndrome: Functional Outcomes, Challenges, and Management Strategies.Audiology research · 2026Review
- [Expert consensus on prognostic evaluation of cochlear implantation in hereditary hearing loss].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2025Article
- Cochlear Implantation Outcomes in Genotyped Subjects with Sensorineural Hearing Loss.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Article
- Prevalence of Molecular Diagnoses for Usher Syndrome and the Need for Coordinated Care.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Determinants of Success in Revision Cochlear Implant Surgeries: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Patient, Surgical, and Radiological Factors.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Current approaches for Usher syndrome disease models and developing therapies.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Type 2 Usher Syndrome - A Cause for Sensorineural Hearing Loss.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2024Article
- Multidisciplinary approach to inherited causes of dual sensory impairment.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024Review
- Navigating the Usher Syndrome Genetic Landscape: An Evaluation of the Associations between Specific Genes and Quality Categories of Cochlear Implant Outcomes.Audiology research · 2024Review
- Concomitant ulcerative colitis and Usher syndrome in a Pakistani patient: A novel case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2024Article
- The Enigmatic Genetic Landscape of Hereditary Hearing Loss: A Multistep Diagnostic Strategy in the Italian Population.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Quality of Life, Neurosensory Disorders and Co-Occurring Medical Conditions in Individuals on the Spectrum, with a Special Focus on Females Diagnosed with Autism: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- The genetic and phenotypic landscapes of Usher syndrome: from disease mechanisms to a new classification.Human genetics · 2022Review
- Usher syndrome IIIA: a review of the disorder and preclinical research advances in therapeutic approaches.Human genetics · 2022Review
- Usher Syndrome.Audiology research · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo systematically appraise the implementation of cochlear implantation (CI) in Usher Syndrome (USH) Types 1, 2, and 3 patients, and analyze who would benefit from CI. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library electronic databases from inception through June 2020 was performed. There were no language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: The PRISMA strategy was followed. Included studies discuss USH patients who underwent CI regardless of age, nationality, or clinical subtype. All included studies report post-implantation functional, cognitive, or quality of life outcomes. Only reviews were excluded.
resultsFifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. USH patients experienced improvements in PTA and speech perception and expression outcomes after CI, as well as improvements in phonological memory and quality of life measures. Overall, patients implanted at younger ages outperformed older patients in audiological testing. Similarly, patients with prolonged auditory deprivation had relatively poor performance outcomes in sentence recognition and speech detection following CI.
conclusionsMost USH patients benefit from CI. USH patients who undergo CI at younger ages generally achieve better hearing, speech, and cognitive outcomes. CI at older ages can still prove beneficial if appropriate auditory amplification is started at the right time. Further research is warranted to fill the gap in understanding regarding the gene mutations underlying the pathophysiology of USH that have favorable CI outcomes as well as the optimal time to perform CI.
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.