SynthesisScientific reports2025
Cochlear implant re-mapping informed by measures of viability of the electrode-neural interface: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 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.
- Biohybrid cochlear implants: neural interfaces, regenerative pathways, and translational benchmarks.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Review
- The Failure Index as Marker of the Neural Health Profile in MED-EL CI Users: A Retrospective Analysis.Trends in hearingArticle
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
The electrode to auditory nerve interface (ENI) is often considered a bottleneck for information transmission for listeners using a cochlear implant (CI). Clinically, it could be beneficial to have a CI programming plan based on optimising information flow based on an individual's ENI status. This review explores whether re-mappings informed by the viability of ENI can improve the speech perception (noise and/or quiet) of adult CI users. Six databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, TRIP, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL), were searched in April 2024 to identify studies that compared an experimental CI mapping method informed by an ENI measure with the routine clinical mapping among adult CI users. A customised questionnaire was created modified from established critical appraisal tools to assess the risk of bias. Data was extracted to compute a standardised mean difference between the control and experimental maps (Cohen's d) and its variance for each article. A mixed-effect model was used to estimate the combined Cohen's d. Linear Regressions were used to probe potential interactions. Thirty articles, mostly within-subject map crossover studies and one RCT, were included. Re-mappings informed by ENI yielded a moderate and significant effect size of 0.48 on speech-in-noise perception. Looking into subgroups, site selection interventions yielded a moderate and significant (p = 0.005) effect size of 0.59. Some site selection interventions were particularly successful while being informed by the low-rate threshold, modulation detection threshold, and electrode discrimination, yielding large and significant effect sizes around 1-1.5. Interventions aiming to reduce the Frequency-to-Place Mismatch by altering the frequency allocation yielded an insignificant (p = 0.32) effect size of 0.47 due to the large variability between and within studies. The variability of outcomes remains substantial both within and between studies. The same intervention is often conducted by the same research group and hence replications at different labs could further strengthen the result. Based on the synthesised result, re-mappings informed by ENI measure could provide better CI hearing to individuals.
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.