ReviewSeminars in hearing2025
Personalizing Auditory Training: Understanding Individual Factors in Adult Cochlear Implant Users.
Review in Seminars in hearing, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cochlear implants (CIs) are an incredibly effective surgical intervention for many adults with moderate-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss and ideally improve communication ability and quality of life. However, although CIs restore sound access, they do not guarantee real-world speech communication abilities. To optimize communication outcomes, CI users have access to numerous auditory training (AT) approaches, including patient-directed and clinician-guided interventions. Despite the widespread use of AT, research on its benefits in adult CI users remains limited, resulting in a critical gap in understanding the individual factors that drive variability in training outcomes among adult CI users. This review paper synthesizes evidence on demographic, auditory, cognitive-linguistic, and psychosocial factors that influence responsiveness to AT. Given the well-documented influence of these factors on speech perception outcomes in adult CI users, we propose that a set of shared or unique factors likely predict CI users' responses to AT interventions. By understanding individual differences, future AT interventions can be better tailored to the needs of each CI user, moving beyond a one-size-fits-all model. In addition, we discuss the need to broaden our outcome assessments of AT beyond traditional speech recognition measures to real-world speech communicative and social functioning, which are likely to impact hearing-related and overall quality of life in this patient population. These insights provide a foundation for more effective, personalized AT strategies that address the diverse needs of adult CI users.
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.