Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37450020›Full record

ArticleHNO2023

[Speech perception as a function of cochlear coverage-comparison in bimodally hearing cochlear implant patients. German version].

Tobias Rader, Leonhard Schrank, Jennifer L Spiegel, Pascal Nachtigäller, Judith E Spiro, John-Martin Hempel, Martin Canis, Joachim Müller

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in HNO, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Influence of cochlear coverage on speech perception in single sided deafness, bimodal, and bilateral implanted cochlear implant patients.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
  2. 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

8 authors.

Tobias RaderAbteilung Audiologie, Klinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, LMU Klinikum der Universität München, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, München, Deutschland. tobias.rader@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Leonhard SchrankAbteilung Audiologie, Klinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, LMU Klinikum der Universität München, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, München, Deutschland.
Jennifer L SpiegelKlinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, LMU Klinikum der Universität München, München, Deutschland.
Pascal NachtigällerAbteilung Audiologie, Klinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, LMU Klinikum der Universität München, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, München, Deutschland.
Judith E SpiroKlinik und Poliklinik für Radiologie, LMU Klinikum der Universität München, München, Deutschland.
John-Martin HempelKlinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, LMU Klinikum der Universität München, München, Deutschland.
Martin CanisKlinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, LMU Klinikum der Universität München, München, Deutschland.
Joachim MüllerKlinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohrenheilkunde, LMU Klinikum der Universität München, München, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHearing success in bimodally hearing patients with a cochlear implant (CI) and a hearing aid (HA) exhibits different results: while some benefit from bimodal CI and HA, others do not.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate hearing success in terms of speech perception in bimodally fitted patients in relation to the cochlear coverage (CC) of the CI electrodes. MATERIALS AND

methodsUsing the OTOPLAN software (CAScination AG, Bern, Switzerland), CC was retrospectively measured from CT scans of the temporal bone of 39 patients, who were then categorized into two groups: CC ≤ 65% (CC

resultsOverall, no significant differences in speech intelligibility were found between CC

conclusionDespite a nonsignificant correlation between CC and speech discrimination, patients seem to reach their maximum in unimodal/unilateral speech understanding mainly at 70-75% coverage. However, there is room for further investigation, as CC

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsSpeech PerceptionHearingHumansRetrospective StudiesComputed tomography scanHearing aidsInsertion depthProstheses and implantsSpeech audiometry

Identifiers

PMID37450020
PMCPMC10403407

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.