ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2023
Time course from cochlear implant surgery to non-use for congenitally deaf recipients implanted as children over ten years ago.
Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To determine the time-course from first cochlear implantation to non-use, to characterise non-users' receptive and expressive communication, and document known risk factors for inconsistent use, for congenitally deaf non-users of cochlear implants implanted as children at least ten years ago. Methods: Retrospective service evaluation. All congenitally deaf patients who received a first cochlear implant as children at least ten years ago at a regional service, and were currently non-users, were identified. They were characterised in terms of ages at implantation and non-use, known risk factors for inconsistent CI use or CI non-use, and outcome measures were the Meaningful Auditory Integration Scale (MAIS) and Meaningful Use of Speech Scale (MUSS) scores. Results: Seventeen patients met the inclusion criteria. They were implanted from 1990 to 2006. Median age at implantation was 4 years (range: 2-11), median age at non-use was 17 years (range: 9-31), and median duration of use was 8.5 years (range: 4-25). All used sign or gesture as their primary expressive and receptive communication modes. In addition, each child had at least one other known risk factor for inconsistent CI use. At 3 years post-implantation, mean Parent-rated MAIS scores were 76.5% ( Discussion: This cohort included cases where CI use was rejected following longer periods of time than previously reported, highlighting a need for long-term support, particularly around the ages of life transitions. Studies conducted when the earliest cohort of paediatric CI users were younger, and studies reliant on parent or patient reports, may under-estimate long-term non-use rates. No non-users were identified among congenitally-deaf children implanted 10-15 years ago. Further research is warranted to explore relationships between risk factors, including communication mode, and non-use to inform expectation setting and candidacy selection.
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.