Observational studyThe Laryngoscope2025
What Do People Want to Know About Cochlear Implants: A Google Analytic Study.
Observational study in The Laryngoscope, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveIdentify the questions most frequently asked online about cochlear implants (CI) and assess the readability and quality of the content.
methodsA Google search engine observational study was conducted via a search response optimization (SEO) tool. The SEO tool listed the questions generated by Google's "People Also Ask" (PAA) feature for the search queries "cochlear implant" and "cochlear implant surgery." The top 50 PAA questions for each query were conceptually classified. Sourced websites were evaluated for readability, transparency and information quality, and ability to answer the question. Readability and accuracy in answering questions were also compared to the responses from ChatGPT 3.5.
resultsThe PAA questions were commonly related to technical details (21%), surgical factors (18%), and postoperative experiences (12%). Sourced websites mainly were from academic institutions, followed by commercial companies. Among all types of websites, readability, on average, did not meet the recommended standard for health-related patient education materials. Only two websites were at or below the 8th-grade level. Responses by ChatGPT had significantly poorer readability compared to the websites (p < 0.001). These online resources were not significantly different in the percentage of accurately answering the questions (websites: 78%, ChatGPT: 85%, p = 0.136).
conclusionsThe most searched topics were technical details about devices, surgical factors, and the postoperative experience. Unfortunately, most websites did not meet the ideal criteria of readability, quality, and credibility for patient education. These results highlight potential knowledge gaps for patients, deficits in current online education materials, and possible tools to better support CI candidate decision-making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 135:840-847, 2025.
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.