ArticlePloS one2024
Predictors of cochlear implant outcomes in pediatric auditory neuropathy: A matched case-control study.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guideline
- Cochlear implantation for sensorineural hearing loss caused by neonatal hyperbilirubinemia.Seminars in perinatology · 2026Review
- Unraveling the Functional Impact of Splicing Variants in Inherited Hearing Disorders Through Minigene Splicing Assays.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Association between cortical auditory evoked potentials recorded directly through cochlear implants and post-implantation auditory and speech outcomes.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesCurrent evidence supports the benefits of cochlear implants (CIs) in children with hearing loss, including those with auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD). However, there is limited evidence regarding factors that hold predictive value for intervention outcomes.
designThis retrospective case-control study consisted of 66 children with CIs, including 22 with ANSD and 44 with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) matched on sex, age, age at CI activation, and the length of follow-up with CIs (1:2 ratio). The case and control groups were compared in the results of five open-set speech perception tests, and a Forward Linear Regression Model was used to identify factors that can predict the post-CI outcomes.
resultsThere was no significant difference in average scores between the two groups across five outcome measures, ranging from 88.40% to 95.65%. The correlation matrix revealed that younger ages at hearing aid fitting and CI activation positively influenced improvements in speech perception test scores. Furthermore, among the variables incorporated in the regression model, the duration of follow-up with CIs, age at CI activation, and the utilization of two CIs demonstrated prognostic significance for improved post-CI speech perception outcomes.
conclusionsChildren with ANSD can achieve similar open-set speech perception outcomes as children with SNHL. A longer CI follow-up, a lower age at CI activation, and the use of two CIs are predictive for optimal CI outcome.
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.