We recently perused Lim et al's study on using machine learning to evaluate prognostic factors affecting hearing after intact canal wall mastoidectomy. 1 Analyzing 3-month postoperative audiometry from 484 patients, they ranked significant factors. 1 While their findings are notable, some methodological issues could impact the study's interpretation.The study bases its definition of a successful postoperative hearing outcome on guidelines from the Korean Otological Society. 2 Specifically, the authors defined success as meeting 2 criteria: a postoperative air-bone gap (ABG) of ≤20 dB and a preoperative air conduction (AC) to postoperative AC value of ≥15 dB. However, in the limitations section, they mention that these are only 2 out of 3 criteria, failing to specify the omitted third criterion. After translating the original Korean guidelines, we found that the missing criterion is a postoperative AC of less than 30 dB. 2 This discrepancy is concerning because the guideline recommends using 3 criteria or ABG classification for 6-month postoperative audiometry. 2 Furthermore, the study introduces ambiguity by stating in the methods section that both criteria should be met ("And") and later in the discussion implying that meeting just 1 criterion suffices. 1 This inconsistency creates confusion. Notably, these criteria fundamentally differ in nature: AC improvement captures a trajectory, whereas the ABG criterion assesses the postoperative condition without accounting for preoperative status. 1 This inconsistency might explain the contradictory conclusions: based on the ABG of ≤20 dB criterion, a better preoperative hearing status predicts a better postoperative outcome, while the opposite is true when considering the other criteria. This incongruence might also be responsible for the observed variations in the importance of the 30 variables discussed in Figures 3 and 5 of their study. 1 The authors suggest that "A larger perforation is associated with a better hearing outcome" associating it with improved AC. 1 This contrasts with prevalent research advocating smaller perforations for optimal