ArticleOtology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology2026
Patient Characteristics Associated With Speech Recognition and Quality of Life Improvement After Cochlear Implantation.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Baseline Differences in Cochlear Implant Candidates: Bilateral Traditional vs. Expanded Indications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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
Abstract
objectiveTo identify patient characteristics associated with improvements in speech recognition scores (SRS) and Cochlear Implant Quality of Life (CIQOL-35) scores following cochlear implantation. STUDY
designMulti-institutional prospective cohort.
settingTertiary medical centers. PATIENTS: Two hundred thirty-five adult CI users with bilateral hearing loss.
main outcome measuresPre-CI and 12-month post-CI CIQOL-35, CNC word (CNC), and AzBio quiet (AzBio) scores were obtained. On the basis of improvement beyond established minimally detectable change values for each CIQOL domain and 95% CIs of pre-CI SRS as compared with post-CI, the cohort was divided into 4 groups for each CIQOL domain/SRS pair: (A) CIQOL and SRS improvement, (B) CIQOL improvement only, (C) SRS improvement only, and (D) no CIQOL or SRS improvement.
resultsCorrelations between CIQOL and SRS improvements were weak ( r =0.02-0.17). Grouped by CIQOL-Global/AzBio after 12 months post-CI, 51% of patients were classified as Group A, 4% as Group B, 39% as Group C, and 7% as Group D; percentages were similar for CIQOL-Global/CNC outcomes. Patients without CIQOL improvement had higher pre-CI CIQOL scores than patients who improved ( d =0.58-2.19), and patients without SRS improvement had higher pre-CI SRS scores than patients who improved (CNC: d =1.35-2.89, AzBio: d =1.09-2.78). Patients in Group D for the Entertainment domain were older than patients in Group A. Other patient factors were not significantly associated with the odds of improvement.
conclusionsPatients with higher baseline scores for a given outcome measure are less likely to improve following cochlear implantation. SRS and CIQOL score improvements were weakly correlated. The vast majority of patients (93%) improved in one or both outcome measures.
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.