ArticleOTO open
Ototoxicity Monitoring: The Evolution of a Protocol for Head and Neck Cancer Patients.
Article in OTO open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Monitoring Ototoxicity in Cancer Patients Undergoing Platinum-Based Chemotherapy and Radiation in Saudi Arabia: Challenges and Solutions.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We evaluated an ototoxicity monitoring program (OMP) for improving audiologic follow-up in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Tertiary academic center. Methods: Two hundred and forty patients were recommended for chemotherapy between January 2017 and June 2022. An OMP was implemented in March 2021; every patient received an audiology referral and was contacted to schedule a pretreatment audiogram. Patients were divided into pre-OMP and post-OMP cohorts. Main outcome measures included rates of pretreatment audiograms, posttreatment audiograms, posttreatment otologic symptoms, and hearing aid utilization. Results: There were 131 patients evaluated pre-OMP and 109 evaluated post-OMP. The mean age for all patients was 62.8 ± 11.9 years; 76.3% were male. After the implementation of the OMP, a significantly higher proportion of patients received a pretreatment audiogram (66.1% vs 34.4%, Conclusion: Implementation of an OMP significantly improved the proportion of HNC patients that underwent pretreatment audiograms prior to systemic therapy; however, audiologic follow-up remained largely unchanged in the posttreatment period. Level of Evidence: Level 4.
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.