Unilateral Multi-Channel Cochlear Implantation Results in Significant Improvement in Quality of Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of unilateral multi-channel cochlear implant surgery on health-related quality of life and to determine if there is an age-related impact of cochlear implantation on these effects. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Tertiary health-care center. METHODS: The Short Form-36 survey (SF-36) was administered to determine the health-related quality of life of 283 age-stratified patients before and after cochlear implant surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES: Precochlear to postcochlear implantation changes in health-related quality of life as determined by the SF-36 questionnaire. RESULTS: There were significant increases in precochlear and postcochlear implantation scores for 5 of the 8 SF-36 survey domains: vitality, physical role functioning, mental health, emotional role functioning, and social functioning. Significant differences were found between age groups in the domains of social functioning, emotion role functioning, and mental health. CONCLUSION: Cochlear implant surgery significantly improves health-related quality of life as categorically stratified by the SF-36 questionnaire. These improvements were most evident in the mental health, emotional and social functioning, and physical functioning at work questions of the survey. Cochlear implant recipients younger than 65 years perceive a greater improvement in their level of energy, mental health, and social function compared with those older than 65 years.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".