[Patient-related outcome measures (PROM) in adult cochlear implant patients].

Stefan Weder, Marco D Caversaccio, Georgios Mantokoudis

Abstract readEnglish Abstract

In one paragraph

Article in HNO, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Stefan WederUniversitätsklinik für Hals‑, Nasen- und Ohrenkrankheiten, Kopf- und Halschirurgie, Inselspital, Freiburgstr. 20, 3012, Bern, Schweiz. stefan.weder@insel.ch.

Marco D CaversaccioUniversitätsklinik für Hals‑, Nasen- und Ohrenkrankheiten, Kopf- und Halschirurgie, Inselspital, Freiburgstr. 20, 3012, Bern, Schweiz.

Georgios MantokoudisUniversitätsklinik für Hals‑, Nasen- und Ohrenkrankheiten, Kopf- und Halschirurgie, Inselspital, Freiburgstr. 20, 3012, Bern, Schweiz.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCochlear implants (CI) provide individuals with severe sensorineural hearing loss the opportunity for artificial auditory perception. The standardized documentation of speech intelligibility tests is widespread, while the systematic capture of patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) remains inconsistent. METHODOLOGY: Relevant PROM instruments were evaluated and selected based on the criteria of dissemination, clarity, and relevance, integrated into routine clinical practice, and tested at longitudinal time points.

resultsA total of three PROM instruments were selected and successfully integrated into the clinical routine. The comparison of 2 measurement points from 25 individuals showed improvements in subjective speech comprehension and tinnitus perception.

conclusionThis study demonstrates the clinical implementation and integration of PROMs in adult CI candidates and patients. The PROMs are a promising tool to support various phases of treatment, both as a decision aid for potential CI candidates and for monitoring after implantation.

Indexed as

Cochlear ImplantsAdultAgedCochlear ImplantationFemaleGermanyHearing Loss, SensorineuralHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPatient SatisfactionTreatment OutcomeCochlear implantHearing lossPatient-related outcome indicatorsQuality of lifeSpeech intelligibility

Identifiers

PMID39259281

DOI10.1007/s00106-024-01510-2

PMCPMC11711562

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.