ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2023
Hearing health care access for adult cochlear implant candidates and recipients: Travel time and socioeconomic status.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determinants of Cochlear Implant Evaluation Completion and Uptake in Children.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Investigating Hearing Loss and Cochlear Implantation Disparities Through the County Health Rankings System.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Impact of Socioeconomic Status and Family Language on Implanted Children's Communication Mode.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Association between the home-to-healthcare center distance and hearing aid abandonment among older adults.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Hearing health care access for adult cochlear implant candidates and recipients: Travel time and socioeconomic status.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: Access to cochlear implantation may be negatively influenced by extended travel time to a cochlear implant (CI) center or lower socioeconomic status (SES) for the individual. There is a critical need to understand the influence of these variables on patient appointment attendance for candidacy evaluations, and CI recipients' adherence to post-activation follow-up recommendations that support optimal outcomes. Methods: A retrospective chart review of adult patients referred to a CI center in North Carolina for initial cochlear implantation candidacy evaluation between April 2017 and July 2019 was conducted. Demographic and audiologic data were collected for each patient. Travel time was determined using geocoding. SES was proxied using ZCTA-level Social Deprivation Index (SDI) information. Independent samples Results: Three hundred and ninety patients met the inclusion criteria. There was a statistically significant difference between SDI of those who attended their candidacy evaluation versus those who did not. Age at referral or travel time did not show statistical significance between these two groups. There was no significant correlation with age at referral, travel time, or SDI with the duration of time (days) between initial activation and the 1-month follow-up. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that SES may influence a patient's ability to attend a cochlear implantation candidacy evaluation appointment and may further impact the decision to pursue cochlear implantation.Level of evidence: 4 - Case Series.
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.