Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41094701›Full record

ArticleOtology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology2026

Improvements in Perceived Abilities and Speech Recognition in Quiet and Noise for Older Adults With Single-sided Deafness or Asymmetric Hearing Loss: A Multi-center Investigation.

Margaret T Dillon, Kari Smilsky, Camille C Dunn, John J Sheets, Maura K Cosetti, Daniel M Zeitler, Kevin D Brown

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Margaret T DillonDepartment of Otolaryngology/Head & Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Kari SmilskyDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Camille C DunnDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.
John J SheetsMED-EL Corporation, Durham, NC.
Maura K CosettiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.
Daniel M ZeitlerDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Virginia Mason Franciscan Health Seattle, Washington.
Kevin D BrownDepartment of Otolaryngology/Head & Neck Surgery, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.

Funding

Speech Production &LanguageP50DC000242 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI Inyong Choi · 1989 to 2026
$58.8M
MED-EL CorporationNIDCD NIH HHS P50 DC000242
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCochlear implantation is an effective treatment option for individuals with single-sided deafness (SSD) and asymmetric hearing loss (AHL). Most data are from young and middle-aged adults. This study assessed the outcomes of cochlear implant (CI) use for older adults. STUDY

designMulti-center, prospective, repeated-measures.

settingFive academic centers. PATIENTS: A total of 39 older adult (60 yr or older) CI users with SSD or AHL.

interventionCochlear implantation.

main outcome measuresProcedures were completed preoperatively with a rerouting device and 3, 6, and 12 months postactivation with the CI. Speech recognition for the affected ear was assessed with CNC words. Speech recognition in noise was assessed with the AzBio sentences. The target was presented from the front loudspeaker and the masker was co-located with the target, 90 degrees toward the better hearing ear, or 90 degrees toward the affected ear. Perceived abilities were assessed with the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of hearing scale.

resultsParticipants demonstrated significant improvements over time on all measures ( p <0.001). There was no significant effect of age on CNC scores ( p =0.493) or perceived abilities ( p =0.314). Age ( p =0.031) and contralateral hearing level ( p <0.001) significantly influenced speech recognition in noise. The majority of participants experienced similar or improved performance in noise compared with their own preoperative abilities.

conclusionsOlder adults with SSD and AHL demonstrate significant benefit from cochlear implantation, supporting its effectiveness for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services beneficiaries. Candidates should be counseled on how age and hearing level in the better hearing ear may affect outcomes, particularly in noisy environments.

Indexed as

DeafnessHearing Loss, UnilateralSpeech PerceptionAgedAged, 80 and overCochlear ImplantationCochlear ImplantsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNoiseProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeGeriatricNew indicationQuality of lifeUnilateral hearing loss

Identifiers

PMID41094701
PMCPMC12576858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.