FOX matches or beats manual cochlear-implant fitting in RCT

AI system

System: FOX (Fitting to Outcome eXpert) / AI-FOX cochlear-implant fitting software
Model: Not assessed
Release: Exact release not established.
Application developer: Otoconsult (per otoconsult.com)
Role: Not assessed
Configuration: The studies used FOX fitting software in 2022 and 2023. The sources do not establish whether this was the later AI-FOX generation.
Inputs and outputs: Not assessed
Autonomy: Not assessed
Workflow: Outcome measurements (thresholds, loudness scaling, speech scores) fed to the FOX recommender. Audiologists applying the recommended MAPs.
Human oversight: Not assessed
Relation to AI: The software proposes MAP settings from measured outcomes. The trials compare it with manual fitting and attribute the measured gains to the FOX maps. All three papers share co-author P. J. Govaerts. The developer's identity is taken from Otoconsult's own site. No record independent of the authors' group is among the sources.
AI contribution: The software proposes MAP settings from measured outcomes. The trials compare it with manual fitting and attribute the measured gains to the FOX maps. All three papers share co-author P. J. Govaerts. The developer's identity is taken from Otoconsult's own site. No record independent of the authors' group is among the sources.

Outcome identifiers: Not assessed
Benefit: 100% of the manual group kept the FOX map and 82% performed better with it
Category: Improved Accessibility
Status: Not assessed
Beneficiary groups: People. Organizations. Society.
Beneficiaries: Not assessed
Reach: Not assessed
Distribution and access: Not assessed
Duration: Not assessed
Expected?: Yes
Costs and harms: Not assessed

Studies: Not assessed
Study design: Not assessed
Measurement: Not assessed
Setting and sample: Not assessed
Measures: 100% of the manual group kept the FOX map and 82% performed better with it
Comparison: Not assessed
Results: 100% of the manual group kept the FOX map and 82% performed better with it
Additional value from AI: Not assessed
Limitations: Not assessed
Denominators: Not assessed
Materials for replication: Not assessed

Participants: Developer: Otoconsult (per otoconsult.com). Operator: Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels.
Jurisdictions: Benefit: Brussels, Belgium. Developer: Belgium. Operator: Belgium.
Ownership and control: Not assessed
Dependencies: Not assessed
Cross-border connections: Not assessed
Geopolitical implications: Not assessed

Conditions for replication: Clinicians accept and apply FOX recommendations. Patients tolerate the map (63% of FOX-arm patients preferred manual maps for comfort).
Replication attempts: 2 follow-up entries. Benefit recurred: 2.
Later findings: Not assessed
Availability: Not assessed
Institutional decision: Not assessed
Grounds: Not assessed
Action and result: Not assessed
Success criterion: Not assessed

Assessed benefits: People. Organizations. Society.
Depth: People: 2. Organizations: 1. Society: Not assessed.
Reasons: People: Better speech intelligibility at 3 and 12 months in newly implanted patients. Median 10% gains in speech scores for experienced users. Organizations: Authors report the FOX approach equivalent or superior in “hearing performance, comfort, and resources”. Society: Single-center studies. No population-level outcome.
Observed or intended: Not assessed
Rubric: Not assessed
Assessor and date: Not assessed
Alternative assessments: Not assessed
Fill: The makers' claim

Kind: Not assessed
Related entries: Not assessed
Field: Health; hearing. Cochlear-implant recipients.
Purpose: Recommend cochlear-implant MAP settings to audiologists from measured auditory outcomes
Dates: Date basis unassessed: 2022 (precision unassessed). Updated: 21 October 2026.
Stage: Not assessed
Version: SHA-256: 9b7d1293e0fe…