The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 20 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Neonatal Ear Molding
Open accessAbstract
View Video S1
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
12 No full text of the sources · 9 Own interpretation · 8 Own result · 4 Sources not found
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Normal anatomic curvature of the helix with appropriate concavity of the scaphoid fossa was restored on the left.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > RESULTS
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our experience has shown that relapse can develop after correction is established.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The right scaphoid fossa still appeared shallow in comparison to the left, and the recommendation was made to continue application of Steri-Strips for an additional 1 week (Fig. 3).”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > RESULTS
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our use of taping for ear molding in a 2-week-old neonate demonstrates an efficient way to correct neonatal ear deformities.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > CONCLUSION
boostedstates a causeSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The efficacy of neonatal ear molding depends on early recognition and initiation of molding therapy.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] 5. Doft MA, Goodkind AB, Diamond S, DiPace JI, Kacker A, LaBruna AN. The newborn butterfly project: a shortened treatment protocol for ear molding. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;135:577e-583e. source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [4] 4. Byrd HS, Langevin CJ, Ghidoni LA. Ear molding in newborn infants with auricular deformities. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;126:1191-1200. source
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Previous studies suggest that a stable and permanent result can be achieved if corrections to neonatal ear cartilage are made by 6 months of age, so follow-up until this age is recommended, with the likelihood of relapse after this point considered to be low.4”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [4] 4. Byrd HS, Langevin CJ, Ghidoni LA. Ear molding in newborn infants with auricular deformities. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;126:1191-1200. source
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Breastfeeding is thought to aid in extending this window due to the presence of maternal estrogen in breast milk. 1”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] 1. Chang CS, Bartlett SP. Deformations of the ear and their nonsurgical correc- tion. Clin Pediatr 2019;58:798-805. source
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This case demonstrates the use of readily available materials to mold bilateral anomalies of the cartilage of helix and antihelix.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
boostedstates a causeSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The efficacy of early treatment corresponds with a physiological peak in circulating maternal estrogen levels, which contribute to increased plasticity of the neonatal auricular cartilage.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1][2][3][4][5]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Petersson et al. 2 describe a successful pilot program implemented at the Mayo Clinic, in which audiologists and audiology technicians performing newborn hearing screens within 24 to 48 hours of birth were trained to identify congenital ear deformities.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2] 2. Petersson RS, Recker CA, Martin JR, Driscoll CL, Friedman O. Identification of congenital auricular deformities during newborn hearing screening allows for non-surgical correction: a Mayo Clinic pilot study. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2012;76:1406-1412. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Early intervention is crucial in the success of ear molding.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] 5. Doft MA, Goodkind AB, Diamond S, DiPace JI, Kacker A, LaBruna AN. The newborn butterfly project: a shortened treatment protocol for ear molding. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;135:577e-583e. source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [4] 4. Byrd HS, Langevin CJ, Ghidoni LA. Ear molding in newborn infants with auricular deformities. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;126:1191-1200. source
plainstates a causen = 96- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Skin tapes meet many of these criteria.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In a series of 158 ears in 96 patients, Doft et al. reported a 96% correction rate.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] 5. Doft MA, Goodkind AB, Diamond S, DiPace JI, Kacker A, LaBruna AN. The newborn butterfly project: a shortened treatment protocol for ear molding. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;135:577e-583e. source
plainn = 96- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Of these patients, 95% initiated treatment within the first 2 weeks of life.5”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] 5. Doft MA, Goodkind AB, Diamond S, DiPace JI, Kacker A, LaBruna AN. The newborn butterfly project: a shortened treatment protocol for ear molding. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;135:577e-583e. source
plainn = 96- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Although rare, such complications have been reported with the use of commercial plastic splints 5”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] 5. Doft MA, Goodkind AB, Diamond S, DiPace JI, Kacker A, LaBruna AN. The newborn butterfly project: a shortened treatment protocol for ear molding. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;135:577e-583e. source
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 12
- Probably not a substantial claim. 9
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The examination of the ears showed flattening of the middle third of the helical rim and widening of the scaphoid fossae (Fig. 1).”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > METHODS
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The patient presented at 13 days old, referred by her pediatrician for bilateral congenital ear anomalies.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > METHODS
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were no deficiencies of the auricular cartilage, skin, or soft tissue bilaterally.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > METHODS
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Taping was applied continuously during the initial 3 weeks and again about 1 month later when some flattening of the left helix recurred.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > RESULTS
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite reports of successful correction of congenital ear-folding anomalies, the potential benefits of ear molding for congenital ear deformities seem to be underrecognized.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Ear molding is a nonsurgical, safe, effective, and costefficient option for the correction of congenital ear deformities during infancy.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1][2][3][4][5]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Once a deformity was identified, a clinician from the Department of Otorhinolaryngology examined the infant's ears, and began molding therapy with custom ear splints. 2”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [2] 2. Petersson RS, Recker CA, Martin JR, Driscoll CL, Friedman O. Identification of congenital auricular deformities during newborn hearing screening allows for non-surgical correction: a Mayo Clinic pilot study. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2012;76:1406-1412. source
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reasons for this are likely attributable to a lack of consensus on indications, duration of treatment, and ideal molding materials.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In contrast, a study by Byrd et al. found that when molding was initiated after 3 weeks of life, only about half of the infants had good outcomes, with a substantial increase in treatment time, often exceeding 3 months.4”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [4] 4. Byrd HS, Langevin CJ, Ghidoni LA. Ear molding in newborn infants with auricular deformities. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;126:1191-1200. source
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The success reported in these clinical reports using readily available materials was followed in 2010 by the introduction of commercially available ear-molding devices such as InfantEar (TalexMedical, Malvern, PA) and the EarWell Infant Ear Correction System (Becon Medical, Naperville, IL), which have demonstrated good results in clinical reports.1,4,5”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] 1. Chang CS, Bartlett SP. Deformations of the ear and their nonsurgical correc- tion. Clin Pediatr 2019;58:798-805. source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [4] 4. Byrd HS, Langevin CJ, Ghidoni LA. Ear molding in newborn infants with auricular deformities. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010;126:1191-1200. source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] 5. Doft MA, Goodkind AB, Diamond S, DiPace JI, Kacker A, LaBruna AN. The newborn butterfly project: a shortened treatment protocol for ear molding. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015;135:577e-583e. source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“After 3 days, estrogen levels begin to decline, falling to baseline levels at approximately 6 weeks of age, with a resultant decreased responsiveness to molding.[1][2][3][4][5]”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1][2][3][4][5]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The first series documenting successful nonsurgical correction of congenital ear anomalies was published in 1984 by Matsuo et al. 3”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [3] 3. Matsuo K, Hirose T, Tomono T. Nonsurgical correction of congenital auricu- lar deformities in the early neonate: a preliminary report. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 1984;73:38-51. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In some cases, recognition of the problem after the ideal therapeutic window for treatment excludes patients from treatment.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Estrogen works to increase the concentration of hyaluronic acid within the cartilaginous intercellular matrix, softening the cartilage, and decreasing elasticity.[1][2][3][4][5]”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [1][2][3][4][5]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Early ear molding may significantly ameliorate a congenital anomaly, making later surgery unnecessary or less extensive.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > CONCLUSION
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Medical tapes are widely available, with low rates of complications, and techniques can be readily taught to caregivers.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > CONCLUSION
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although not every contour anomaly is appropriate for molding, the option to lessen the severity of this problem may spare young children from teasing and even bullying in their early lives.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > CONCLUSION
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This approach could avoid delays in early detection and allow for the start of molding during the time of greatest benefit to the patient.”
§ How I Do It Neonatal Ear Molding > DISCUSSION
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Citations
Cites
Plastic and reconstructive surgery
Goodacre, T. (2008) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/b13454-41 · Cited by 924
Matsuo, K., Hirose, T., Tomono, T., Iwasawa, M., Katohda, S., Takahashi, N., & Koh, B. (1984) · Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/00006534-198401000-00009 · Cited by 303
Ear Molding in Newborn Infants with Auricular Deformities
Byrd, H. S., Langevin, C.-J., & Ghidoni, L. A. (2010) · Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/prs.0b013e3181e617bb · Cited by 178
The Newborn Butterfly Project: A Shortened Treatment Protocol for Ear Molding
Doft, M. A., Goodkind, A. B., Diamond, S., DiPace, J. I., Kacker, A., & LaBruna, A. N. (2015) · Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/prs.0000000000000999 · Cited by 93
Petersson, R. S., Recker, C. A., Martin, J. R. K., Driscoll, C. L. W., & Friedman, O. (2012) · International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology · doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2012.06.011 · Cited by 33
Deformations of the Ear and Their Nonsurgical Correction
Chang, C. S., & Bartlett, S. P. (2019) · Clinical Pediatrics · doi:10.1177/0009922819844296 · Cited by 30
Matsuo, K., Hirose, T., Tomono, T., Iwasawa, M., Katohda, S., Takahashi, N., Koh, B., Tanzer, R. C., & Tanzer, R. C. (1984) · Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/00006534-198401000-00010
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Facial Soft Tissue Injuries in Pediatric Patients
Schild, S. D., Puntarelli, T. R., delaPena, M., Johnson, A. B., & Butts, S. C. (2021) · Facial Plastic Surgery · doi:10.1055/s-0041-1727246 · Cited by 8
“54 The effectiveness of these techniques is related to the unique soft tissue qualities in neonates and infants that are receptive to molding and orthopaedic treatments.”
BackgroundSelf-citationGender-Affirming Hormone Therapy
Haben, C. M. (2022) · Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.otc.2022.04.002 · Cited by 4
Evaluation and Nonsurgical Treatment of Neonatal Ear Anomalies
Moss, C. R., & Gargaro, C. (2022) · Advances in Neonatal Care · doi:10.1097/anc.0000000000000999 · Cited by 3
Daikhes, N. A., Диаб, Х. М., Сергеевич, К. Д., Pashchinina, O. A., & Balakina, L. V. (2022) · Вопросы современной педиатрии · doi:10.15690/vsp.v21i4.2434 · Cited by 3
Update on congenital ear molding
Roby, B. B., Woods, T., & Chinnadurai, S. (2023) · Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head & Neck Surgery · doi:10.1097/moo.0000000000000895 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Gulati, R. D., Faraci, N., & Butts, S. C.
- Affiliations
- SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Butts, Sydney C.
- Venue
- The Laryngoscope
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-07-03
- Volume
- 131
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- E423-E427
- ISSN
- 0023-852X (ISSN-L)
- 1531-4995
- OpenAlex
- W3039362753
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 0.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Laryngoscope (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics (clinical) › Congenital Ear and Nasal Anomalies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Reconstructive Facial Surgery Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Craniofacial Disorders and Treatments
- Keywords
- infant hearing loss, conductive hearing loss, middle ear
- MeSH terms
- Ear Cartilage, Ear, External, Female, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Plastic Surgery Procedures, Ear Auricle
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
