The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Tinnitus after Simultaneous and Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implantation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Surgery, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fsurg.2017.00065 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Geerte G. J. Ramakers, Véronique J. C. Kraaijenga, Yvette E. Smulders, Alice van Zon, Inge Stegeman, Robert J. Stokroos, Rolien H. Free, Johan H. M. Frijns, Wendy J. Huinck, Gijsbert A. Van Zanten, Wilko Grolman |
| Abstract |
There is an ongoing global discussion on whether or not bilateral cochlear implantation should be standard care for bilateral deafness. Contrary to unilateral cochlear implantation, however, little is known about the effect of bilateral cochlear implantation on tinnitus. To investigate tinnitus outcomes 1 year after bilateral cochlear implantation. Secondarily, to compare tinnitus outcomes between simultaneous and sequential bilateral cochlear implantation and to investigate long-term follow-up (3 years). This study is a secondary analysis as part of a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Thirty-eight postlingually deafened adults were included in the original trial, in which the presence of tinnitus was not an inclusion criterion. All participants received cochlear implants (CIs) because of profound hearing loss. Nineteen participants received bilateral CIs simultaneously and 19 participants received bilateral CIs sequentially with an inter-implant interval of 2 years. The prevalence and severity of tinnitus before and after simultaneous and sequential bilateral cochlear implantation were measured preoperatively and each year after implantation with the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) and Tinnitus Questionnaire (TQ). The prevalence of preoperative tinnitus was 42% (16/38). One year after bilateral implantation, there was a median difference of -8 (inter-quartile range (IQR): -28 to 4) in THI score and -9 (IQR: -17 to -9) in TQ score in the participants with preoperative tinnitus. Induction of tinnitus occurred in five participants, all in the simultaneous group, in the year after bilateral implantation. Although the preoperative and also the postoperative median THI and TQ scores were higher in the simultaneous group, the median difference scores were equal in both groups. In the simultaneous group, tinnitus scores fluctuated in the 3 years after implantation. In the sequential group, four patients had an additional benefit of the second CI: a total suppression of tinnitus compared with their unilateral situation. While bilateral cochlear implantation can have a positive effect on preoperative tinnitus complaints, the induction of (temporary or permanent) tinnitus was also reported. Dutch Trial Register NTR1722. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 35 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 49% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Engineering | 3 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 November 2017.
All research outputs
#17,919,786
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#784
of 2,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,197
of 325,998 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#10
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,978 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,998 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.