ArticlePloS one2025
Pediatric cochlear implantation: The impact of frequency-to-place mismatch after a three-year follow-up.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFrequency-to-place mismatch in cochlear implants (CIs) may influence auditory and speech outcomes, yet its impact on pediatric patients remains underexplored. This study aims to assess the impact of frequency-to-place mismatch on hearing and speech outcomes. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this retrospective study, the angular insertion depth and center frequency of each electrode contact were derived. The difference between the tonotopic and default frequency was used to estimate the mismatch. The impact of this mismatch on auditory and speech outcomes was assessed in pediatric CI users.
resultsThis study included 89 implanted ears of young children. The analysis revealed a significant difference between default and postoperative electrode frequencies, with greater mismatches observed in shorter electrode arrays. A weak but significant correlation was observed between mismatch and sound field-aided thresholds (SF-AT), while no clear trends were found in other outcome measures. Patients with lower mismatches tended to perform better, while those with mismatches exceeding 7 semitones showed slightly lower-though non-significant-speech performance. However, a significant difference was observed in SIR, favoring the lower mismatch group.
conclusionChildren with <7 semitones of fequency-to-place mismatch showed better, though non-significant, outcomes across multiple measures-including SDS, CAP, and SF-AT-and a significant difference in SIR. Despite no significant linear correlations overall, these findings suggest that specific mismatch levels may still influence outcomes after three years of CI use. Future studies should investigate whether tonotopic-based mapping improves speech perception and overall auditory performance in young 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.