ArticleBMJ open2022
Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating the benefits from bimodal solution with cochlear implant and hearing aid versus bilateral hearing aids in patients with asymmetric speech identification scores.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04919928 (Benefits From Bimodal Fittings With Cochlear Implant and Hearing Aid vs Bilateral Hearing Aids in Patients With Asymmetric Speech Identification Scores), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Benefits From Bimodal Fittings With Cochlear Implant and Hearing Aid vs Bilateral Hearing Aids in Patients With Asymmetric Speech Identification Scores: a Randomised Controlled Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Replacement Hearing Aids in Cochlear Implant Candidates Using the Hearing in Noise Test (HINT) and Pupillometry.Audiology research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCochlear implant (CI) and hearing aid (HA) in a bimodal solution (CI+HA) is compared with bilateral HAs (HA+HA) to test if the bimodal solution results in better speech intelligibility and self-reported quality of life. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This randomised controlled trial is conducted in Odense University Hospital, Denmark. Sixty adult bilateral HA users referred for CI surgery are enrolled if eligible and undergo: audiometry, speech perception in noise (HINT: Hearing in Noise Test), Speech Identification Scores and video head impulse test. All participants will receive new replacement HAs. After 1 month they will be randomly assigned (1:1) to the intervention group (CI+HA) or to the delayed intervention control group (HA+HA). The intervention group (CI+HA) will receive a CI on the ear with a poorer speech recognition score and continue using the HA on the other ear. The control group (HA+HA) will receive a CI after a total of 4 months of bilateral HA use.The primary outcome measures are speech intelligibility measured objectively with HINT (sentences in noise) and DANTALE I (words) and subjectively with the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are patient reported Health-Related Quality of Life scores assessed with the Nijmegen Cochlear Implant Questionnaire, the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory and Dizziness Handicap Inventory. Third outcome is listening effort assessed with pupil dilation during HINT.In conclusion, the purpose is to improve the clinical decision-making for CI candidacy and optimise bimodal solutions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee Southern Denmark project ID S-20200074G. All participants are required to sign an informed consent form.This study will be published on completion in peer-reviewed publications and scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04919928.
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.