ReviewAudiology research2023
A Systematic Review of the Audiological Efficacy of Cartilage Conduction Hearing Aids and the Factors Influencing Their Clinical Application.
Review in Audiology research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and benefit of cartilage conduction hearing aids (CC-HAs) and that factors that influence purchasing decisions. The hearing thresholds and functional gain following CC-HA wear were synthesised. A one-way analysis of variance compared the differences in the hearing thresholds and functional gain at individual frequencies and in patients with a variety of pathological changes. The synchronised aided hearing threshold and functional gain at 2.0 kHz were significantly better than at 0.5, 1.0, and 4.0 kHz. There was no significant difference in the synchronised unaided hearing thresholds across individual frequencies between 0.5 and 4.0 kHz. The synchronised functional gain in patients with atresia was significantly greater than in patients with aural atresia or stenosis and middle ear pathologies with normal ear canals. The acceptability of CC-HAs in terms of purchase decision is influenced by the condition of the external auditory meatus and severity of hearing loss, with the highest purchase rate seen in patients with aural atresia or stenosis. CC-HAs' fitting procedure advantages and cosmetic considerations make these devices a viable and preferred choice for individuals with microtia and aural atresia. Additional research to evaluate the benefits towards emotional well-being is crucial to gain insights into the psychological impact of CC-HA use.
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.