Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Erratum: Mathematical modeling of vowel perception by users of analog multichannel cochlear implants: Temporal and channel-amplitude cues. [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107(3), 1521-1529 (2000)].

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America·2026
Same author

Brain morphological changes in acquired hearing loss: A surface-based morphometry study.

PloS one·2026
Same author

Auditory Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation in Chronic Otitis Media Compared to Standard Implantation.

Ear, nose, & throat journal·2026
Same author

Incidence of Trans-Impedance Matrix Pattern Variants in Patients With Normal Anatomy Receiving Cochlear Implantation.

Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology·2026
Same author

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of adult patients with Hafnia alvei bacteremia in a tertiary care hospital.

Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease·2026
Same author

Prognostic Significance of 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure and Holter Monitoring in Patients without Atrial Fibrillation.

Ewha medical journal·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 14, 2025

Systematic Hearing Performance Evaluation Process for Adolescents with Cochlear Implantation at Early Ages
06:04

Systematic Hearing Performance Evaluation Process for Adolescents with Cochlear Implantation at Early Ages

Published on: March 24, 2023

472

Cochlear Implants and the Aided Audiogram: A Retrospective Study Comparing Performance Across Device Manufacturers.

Nicole Hope Capach1, Noam Zigdon1, Taylor A Payne1

  • 1Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA.

Audiology Research
|July 23, 2025
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Cochlear implant manufacturers show differences in hearing thresholds and speech perception. Programming methods, specifically T-level measurement, may influence these outcomes.

Keywords:
T-levelsaided audiogramsaudiological evaluationscochlear implant programmingcochlear implantselectrical stimulation levelshearing outcomes

More Related Videos

Enhancing Electrode Location Assessment in Cochlear Implantation via Computed Tomography Image Fusion
03:58

Enhancing Electrode Location Assessment in Cochlear Implantation via Computed Tomography Image Fusion

Published on: January 17, 2025

537
Author Spotlight: Advancements in Impedance Monitoring for Cochlear Implant Surgery
06:54

Author Spotlight: Advancements in Impedance Monitoring for Cochlear Implant Surgery

Published on: August 4, 2023

1.3K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 14, 2025

Systematic Hearing Performance Evaluation Process for Adolescents with Cochlear Implantation at Early Ages
06:04

Systematic Hearing Performance Evaluation Process for Adolescents with Cochlear Implantation at Early Ages

Published on: March 24, 2023

472
Enhancing Electrode Location Assessment in Cochlear Implantation via Computed Tomography Image Fusion
03:58

Enhancing Electrode Location Assessment in Cochlear Implantation via Computed Tomography Image Fusion

Published on: January 17, 2025

537
Author Spotlight: Advancements in Impedance Monitoring for Cochlear Implant Surgery
06:54

Author Spotlight: Advancements in Impedance Monitoring for Cochlear Implant Surgery

Published on: August 4, 2023

1.3K

Area of Science:

  • Audiology
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Hearing Science

Background:

  • Cochlear implants (CIs) are crucial for hearing restoration.
  • Variations in CI performance across manufacturers are not fully understood.
  • Understanding these differences can optimize patient outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare CI-aided hearing thresholds and speech perception scores across different CI manufacturers.
  • To investigate the relationship between CI-aided thresholds and speech perception abilities.
  • To explore potential reasons for observed performance differences.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of exploratory data from NYU and confirmatory data from ASAN clinic (120 CI users).
  • Comparison of CI-aided soundfield evaluations between Cochlear, Advanced Bionics (AB), and MED-EL manufacturers.
  • Assessment using pure-tone averages (PTAs), incidence of elevated thresholds, and speech perception scores.

Main Results:

  • MED-EL and AB users exhibited significantly poorer pure-tone averages compared to Cochlear users.
  • A higher percentage of MED-EL and AB users had elevated 5- or 6-pure-tone averages (PTAs) above 35 dB HL.
  • Cochlear users demonstrated superior word and sentence recognition scores, potentially linked to behaviorally-measured T-levels.

Conclusions:

  • Significant disparities in CI-aided thresholds and speech perception exist among manufacturers.
  • Brand-specific T-level programming strategies may contribute to these observed performance variations.
  • Further research into programming methodologies is warranted to enhance CI efficacy.