ArticleJournal of audiology & otology2022
Diagnostic Validity of Auditory Brainstem Response for the Initial Screening of Vestibular Schwannoma.
Article in Journal of audiology & otology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Audiological findings and analysis in 93 cases of unilateral vestibular schwannoma].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2026Article
- [Clinical characteristics of acoustic neuroma patients with normal hearing].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2022Article
- Sudden sensorineural hearing loss as the initial symptom in patients with acoustic neuroma.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesTo investigate the diagnostic validity of auditory brainstem response (ABR) in the screening of vestibular schwannoma (VS). SUBJECTS AND
methodsForty patients diagnosed with VS using magnetic resonance imaging who had undergone ABR before treatment between 2005 and 2015 were included. ABR results were considered positive when findings met at least one of the following criteria: 1) absent evoked response, 2) desynchronization of waves other than wave I, 3) interpeak latency (IPL) between waves I and III >2.5 ms, 4) IPL between waves I and V >4.4 ms, 5) wave V interaural latency difference >0.2 ms, and 6) interaural difference in IPL between waves I and V >0.2 ms.
resultsThe overall sensitivity of ABR was 85.0%. For tumors measuring <10 mm, the sensitivity of ABR was 66.7%, whereas it increased to 90.3% for tumors measuring >10 mm. The sensitivity of tumors confined to the internal acoustic canal was 73.3% compared with 100.0% for tumors confined to the cerebellopontine angle. In patients with serviceable hearing, the mean tumor size was 7.8±2.9 mm in patients with a normal ABR and 15.1±9.4 mm in patients with an abnormal ABR, indicating a significant difference (p<0.05).
conclusionsABR alone is insufficient for the screening of VS, bearing the risk of false-negative outcomes when examining small, intracanalicular tumors. However, ABR can be inexpensively applied for the screening of VS measuring >10 mm in patients with serviceable hearing, supporting the need for further active diagnostic and treatment modalities in clinical practice.
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.