Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35596162›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2022

Quality-assured training in the evaluation of cochlear implant electrode position: a prospective experimental study.

Alexander Mewes, Sebastian Burg, Goetz Brademann, Jan Andreas Dambon, Matthias Hey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Curvature analysis of CI electrode arrays: a novel approach to categorize perimodiolar positions without anatomical landmarks.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 · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Alexander MewesUniversitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Campus Kiel, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kiel, Germany. alexander.mewes@uksh.de.
Sebastian BurgChristian-Albrechts-Universität (CAU) zu Kiel, Faculty of Medicine, Kiel, Germany.
Goetz BrademannUniversitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Campus Kiel, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kiel, Germany.
Jan Andreas DambonUniversitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Campus Kiel, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kiel, Germany.
Matthias HeyUniversitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Campus Kiel, Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Kiel, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of this study was to demonstrate the utility of an approach in training predoctoral medical students, to enable them to measure electrode-to-modiolus distances (EMDs) and insertion-depth angles (aDOIs) in cochlear implant (CI) imaging at the performance level of a single senior rater.

methodsThis prospective experimental study was conducted on a clinical training dataset comprising patients undergoing cochlear implantation with a Nucleus® CI532 Slim Modiolar electrode (N = 20) or a CI512 Contour Advance electrode (N = 10). To assess the learning curves of a single medical student in measuring EMD and aDOI, interrater differences (senior-student) were compared with the intrarater differences of a single senior rater (test-retest). The interrater and intrarater range were both calculated as the distance between the 0.1th and 99.9th percentiles. A "deliberate practice" training approach was used to teach knowledge and skills, while correctives were applied to minimize faulty data-gathering and data synthesis.

resultsIntrarater differences of the senior rater ranged from - 0.5 to 0.5 mm for EMD and - 14° to 16° for aDOI (respective medians: 0 mm and 0°). Use of the training approach led to interrater differences that matched this after the 4th (EMD) and 3rd (aDOI) feedback/measurement series had been provided to the student.

conclusionsThe training approach enabled the student to evaluate the CI electrode position at the performance level of a senior rater. This finding may offer a basis for ongoing clinical quality assurance for the assessment of CI electrode position.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsCochleaElectrodes, ImplantedHumansProspective StudiesAngular depth of insertionCochlear implantElectrode positionElectrode-to-modiolus distanceQuality assurance

Identifiers

PMID35596162
PMCPMC9121556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.