ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Cochlear Implantation Improves Both Speech Perception and Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Prospective Follow-Up Study of Treatment Benefits among Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of cochlear implantation on quality of life in patients with age-related hearing loss: a systematic review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Pooled it
- Nonword Repetition Assessing Auditory and Cognitive Abilities in Adult Cochlear Implant Users.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2026Article
- Advances in the treatment of age-related hearing loss: from molecular mechanisms to targeted interventions.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Review
- Longitudinal Cochlear Implant Outcomes in Danish Adults: Changes in Speech Recognition, Self-Reported Hearing Ability, Hearing-Related Quality of Life, and Tinnitus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Improvement in self-perceived hearing and quality of life is associated with the time elapsed since cochlear implantation in adults with post-lingual hearing loss.Journal of otology · 2025Article
- Accuracy and variability in clinical predictions of speech recognition outcomes for cochlear implant users.International journal of audiology · 2025Article
- Highly compromised auditory spatial perception in aided congenitally hearing-impaired and rapid improvement with tactile technology.iScience · 2024Article
- X-ray guided anatomy-based fitting: The validity of OTOPLAN.PloS one · 2024Article
- Comparison of response properties of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve reported in human listeners and in animal models.Hearing 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cochlear implantation is considered the best treatment option for patients with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss for whom conventional hearing aids are insufficient. We used a repeated measures longitudinal approach to evaluate speech recognition and patient-reported outcomes after cochlear implantation in an unbiased cohort of Danish adult patients in a prospective cohort study. We assessed 39 recipients before and two times after implantation using a battery of tests that included Dantale I, the Danish Hearing in Noise Test, the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, and the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale. The study group improved significantly on all outcome measures following implantation. On average, Dantale I scores improved by 29 percentage points and Hearing in Noise Test scores improved by 22 percentage points. Most notably, the average Dantale score improved from 26 to 70% in the CI in quiet condition and from 12 to 42% in the cochlear implantation in noise condition when tested monaurally. Dantale demonstrated a significant positive correlation with Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire and Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale scores, while Hearing in Noise Test had no significant correlation with the patient-reported outcome measures. Patients improved significantly at 4 months and marginally improved further at 14 months, indicating that they were approaching a plateau. Our study's use of audiometric and patient-reported outcome measures provides evidence of the treatment benefits of cochlear implantation in adults, which may help physicians advise patients on treatment decisions and align treatment benefit expectations, as well as serve as a foundation for the development of new cochlear implantation selection criteria.
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.