ArticleThe Laryngoscope2025
Access to Cochlear Implantation: Trends in Surgeon Volume and Training.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Access and Attrition Across Audiology and Cochlear Implant Care Among Older Adults with Bilateral Sensorineural Hearing Loss.Otology & neurotology open · 2026Article
- Cochlear Implantation in the United Arab Emirates: Otolaryngologists' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices.Audiology research · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesEvaluate the training background of surgeons performing high volumes of cochlear implants (CIs) and estimate the ratio of providers trained in otology/neurotology (O&N) to the number of traditional CI candidates and audiologists.
methodsA retrospective review of US surgeon registration data from a single CI manufacturer was performed to determine CI volume based on surgeon training. The prevalence of traditional candidates for CIs was estimated from US census population data and compared with the number of O&N providers. The ratio of audiologists to O&N providers was estimated from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics and American Speech-Language-Hearing Association databases.
resultsFrom 2021 to 2023, a mean of 88% of providers performing ≥25 CIs per year and 90% performing ≥40 per year had training in O&N. All surgeons registering ≥100 implants per year were O&N providers. The mean percentage of O&N providers performing ≥25 CIs per year and ≥ 40 per year was higher than the percentage of General and Pediatric Otolaryngology providers performing the same volume: mean difference = 76%, p < 0.001 and mean difference = 79%, p < 0.001, respectively. The mean estimated prevalence of traditional CI candidates per O&N provider is 3,354 with an estimated mean of 32 audiologists (3.5 trained in CIs) per O&N provider.
conclusion88% of high-volume CI surgeons have fellowship training in O&N. To meet the current state of CI underutilization and anticipated growing population of CI candidates, we propose increasing the surgical capacity of O&N providers and the number of surgeons proficient in CIs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 135:2146-2153, 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.