ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023
Towards personalized and optimized fitting of cochlear implants.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Physical Replacement to Biological Symbiosis: Evolutionary Paradigms and Future Prospects of Auditory Reconstruction Brain-Computer Interfaces.Micromachines · 2026Review
- Etiology-Driven Personalized Cochlear Implantation: Implications for Electrode Choice, Timing, and Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- 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
- Integrating Computational Modelling into the Ecosystem of Cochlear Implantation: Advancing Access to Diagnostics, Decision-Making, and Post-Implantation Outcomes on a Global Scale.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Age-Related Decline in Neural Phase-Locking to Envelope and Temporal Fine Structure Revealed by Frequency Following Responses: A Potential Signature of Cochlear Synaptopathy Impairing Speech Intelligibility.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Article
- Measuring Spectrotemporal Sensitivity in Cochlear Implant Users With a Reaction-Time Paradigm: A Comparison of Two Implementations.Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A cochlear implant (CI) is a neurotechnological device that restores total sensorineural hearing loss. It contains a sophisticated speech processor that analyzes and transforms the acoustic input. It distributes its time-enveloped spectral content to the auditory nerve as electrical pulsed stimulation trains of selected frequency channels on a multi-contact electrode that is surgically inserted in the cochlear duct. This remarkable brain interface enables the deaf to regain hearing and understand speech. However, tuning of the large (>50) number of parameters of the speech processor, so-called "device fitting," is a tedious and complex process, which is mainly carried out in the clinic through 'one-size-fits-all' procedures. Current fitting typically relies on limited and often subjective data that must be collected in limited time. Despite the success of the CI as a hearing-restoration device, variability in speech-recognition scores among users is still very large, and mostly unexplained. The major factors that underly this variability incorporate three levels: (i) variability in auditory-system
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.