ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2026
Assessment of Noninvasive Ear Molding: A Classification-Guided Approach.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate the clinical application and long-term efficacy of ear molding devices and to explore future treatment strategies for auricular morphological deformity (AMD). Methods: Clinical data of patients with AMDs who visited our department between 2017 and 2022 were retrospectively collected. This study included 102 cases who underwent noninvasive ear molding correction and were followed up for more than 3 years. The correction of different types of AMDs-such as prominent ear, cup ear, cryptotia, and lop ear-was analyzed in detail. Correction outcomes were recorded. Results: The overall success rate of correction was 85.29%. No significant differences were found in total wear time among different deformity types. Similarly, no significant differences were observed in correction outcomes across different morphological types of AMDs. The age at treatment initiation was positively correlated with total wear time. Both the age at treatment initiation and total wear time influenced the correction outcomes. Age ≤ 7 days and total correction time ≤ 28 days were independently associated with better treatment outcomes, each exerting a significant and non-confounding effect on prognosis. Notably, only one case developed relatively severe eczema, which interrupted device wear for approximately 1 week; this complication was not associated with the use of domestic or imitation correction devices. Conclusion: While different correction approaches may vary in their application across deformity types, the long-term correction outcomes are comparable among different morphological classifications. The final outcome is influenced by the age at which correction is initiated and the total wear time. Only a small proportion of patients experienced complications that affected device wear. Noninvasive ear molding is an effective treatment modality with favorable long-term outcomes. Level of Evidence: 4.
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.