SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2024
Auditory and speech outcomes of cochlear implantation in patients with Waardenburg syndrome: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Analysis of the clinical features of neurocristopathy-related hearing loss and how these relate to outcomes after cochlear implantation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- [Expert consensus on prognostic evaluation of cochlear implantation in hereditary hearing loss].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 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
Objective: This study aims to assess the potential efficacy of cochlear implantation as a treatment for patients with Waardenburg syndrome (WS) and to guide clinical work by comparing the effect of auditory and speech recovery after cochlear implantation in patients with WS and non-WS. Methods: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang Data were sources for retrieving literature on cochlear implantation in WS, and clinical data meeting the inclusion criteria were meta-analyzed using RevMan5.41. Results: A total of nine articles were included in this study, including 132 patients with WS and 815 patients in the control group. Meta-analysis showed that there are no significant differences in the scores for categories of audit performance (CAP), speech intelligibility rating (SIR), and parents' evaluation of aural/oral performance of children (PEACH) between the WS group and the control group. Conclusion: Cochlear implantation demonstrates comparable auditory and speech recovery outcomes for WS patients and non-WS patients.
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.