ArticleThe Laryngoscope2024
American Cochlear Implant Alliance Task Force: Recommendations for Determining Cochlear Implant Candidacy in Adults.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cochlear implant procedure. Italian Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Italian Society of Otorhinolaryngology (SIOeChCF) and Italian Society of Audiology and Phoniatrics (SIAF). Part 1: cochlear implants in adults.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2025Guideline
- Access and Attrition Across Audiology and Cochlear Implant Care Among Older Adults with Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss.Otology & neurotology open · 2026Article
- A Multidimensional Comparison of Psychosocial Adjustment, Functional Hearing, and Device Benefit in Adult Hearing Device Users.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Extended Indications for Cochlear Implantation Beyond Conventional Criteria.Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2026Article
- Factors Affecting Audiometric and Speech Perception Outcomes in Hybrid Cochlear Implant Recipients.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Relationship Between Electrical Dynamic Range and Speech Perception Outcomes in Experienced Post-Lingually Deaf Adult Cochlear Implant Users: A Bicentric Study.Audiology research · 2026Article
- Learning Effects of the Dutch/Flemish Matrix Test for Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users.Audiology & neuro-otology · 2026Article
- Cochlear Implants and Adult Patient Experiences, Adaptation and Challenges: A Survey.Audiology research · 2025Article
- Multisensory assessment for hearing phenotypes.Hearing research · 2025Article
- Access to Cochlear Implantation: Trends in Surgeon Volume and Training.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Evidence for the Necessity of Objective Hearing Tests in Cochlear Implantation Assessment: Excluding Functional Hearing Loss Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Validating the Iowa Test of Consonant Perception in a large cohort of cochlear implant users.JASA express letters · 2025Article
- Utilization of the Spanish Bisyllable Word Recognition Test to Assess Cochlear Implant Performance Trajectory.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Equitable access to cochlear implants: a perspective on social justice and international obligations.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Cochlear Implantation: Long-Term Effect of Early Activation on Electrode Impedance.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Cochlear Implants: An Overview.Missouri medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The indications for cochlear implantation have expanded over time due to evidence demonstrating identification and implantation of appropriate cochlear implant (CI) candidates lead to significant improvements in speech recognition and quality of life (QoL). However, clinical practice is variable, with some providers using outdated criteria and others exceeding current labeled indications. As a results, only a fraction of those persons who could benefit from CI technology receive it. This document summarizes the current evidence for determining appropriate referrals for adults with bilateral hearing loss into CI centers for formal evaluation by stressing the importance of treating each ear individually and a "revised 60/60 rule". By mirroring contemporary clinical practice and available evidence, these recommendations will also provide a standardized testing protocol for CI candidates using a team-based approach that prioritizes individualized patient care. This manuscript was developed by the Adult Cochlear Implantation Candidacy Task Force of the American Cochlear Implant Alliance using review of the existing literature and clinical consensus. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A Laryngoscope, 134:S1-S14, 2024.
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.