ReviewFrontiers in neurology2025
Clinical trials in otology and neurotology: state of the science.
Review in Frontiers in neurology, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the current state of interventional clinical trials in otology and neurotology. Study design/methods: Review of registered clinical trials on ClinicalTrials.gov from January 1st 2019 through May 31st 2025. Interventional trials and those that met keyword criteria for otologic/neurotologic disorders were included. For each study, key characteristics including trial status, trial phase, study design, participants, intervention type, funding source, and results status were collected. Setting: National database. Results: Though the number of interventional otologic and neurotologic clinical trials has grown over the past 15 years, in the past 5 years, there has been a stagnation of the steady growth seen in the preceding ten. The greatest proportion of trials were focused on hearing loss, utilized devices, were randomized, and were funded by sources other than industry or the government. Compared to 2008-2018, trends included a shift towards device and procedural interventions for vestibular disorders and a decrease in device trials and increase in behavioral interventions for tinnitus. Emerging areas include novel pharmacological and gene therapies for hearing loss and vestibular schwannoma, but these areas remain gaps and are promising therapeutic avenues that merit further exploration. Conclusion: Future interval assessments exploring the trends in otologic and neurotologic clinical trials should be performed to identify gaps that offer opportunities for innovation of novel therapies and to monitor the health of the clinical trial environment.
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.