ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Comparative effectiveness of initial systemic versus intratympanic corticosteroid therapy for sudden sensorineural hearing loss: a retrospective cohort study with doubly robust analysis.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. 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
Background: The optimal initial corticosteroid strategy for idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) remains uncertain, and randomized trials may not capture real-world variability. Observational comparisons are vulnerable to confounding, particularly when post-treatment variables are inappropriately adjusted. We evaluated the real-world comparative effectiveness of initial systemic versus intratympanic corticosteroids using a prespecified causal inference framework. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study (2012-2019) of adults with idiopathic SSNHL and complete baseline and discharge audiometry. Patients receiving combined systemic-intratympanic therapy or missing exposure data were excluded. The exposure was the initial corticosteroid route (systemic oral/IV vs. intratympanic). Propensity scores were estimated from baseline covariates including age, sex, symptom profile, comorbidities, baseline PTA, and time from symptom onset to treatment initiation. Primary estimation used augmented inverse probability of treatment weighting (AIPW) to retain all eligible patients; 1:1 propensity-score matching (caliper 0.2 SD of logit PS) with regression adjustment addressed residual imbalance as a sensitivity analysis. Outcomes were PTA gain (primary), complete recovery (≥30 dB gain), and effective improvement (≥15 dB gain). Results: Among 284 adults (systemic = 240; intratympanic = 44), crude mean PTA gain was 13.8 vs. 3.8 dB (difference 10.0 dB). In AIPW analysis, systemic therapy was associated with greater PTA gain (adjusted mean difference 10.1 dB; 95% bootstrap CI 1.8-19.5) and a higher probability of complete recovery (adjusted risk difference 16.9%; 95% CI 9.4-23.4). The risk difference for effective improvement was 11.4% (95% CI - 15.3 to 30.9). Findings were directionally consistent in IPTW, overlap-weighted, and matched analyses. Conclusion: In this single-center real-world cohort, initial systemic corticosteroids were associated with greater short-term hearing improvement and a higher likelihood of complete recovery compared with intratympanic therapy. Weighting-based doubly robust estimators improved precision and generalizability, while matched analyses yielded consistent direction but wider uncertainty.
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.