Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19145417›Full record

ReviewHNO2009

[Newborn hearing impairment. Epidemiology and therapeutic relevance].

G Reuter, C Krauth, T Lenarz

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in HNO, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 99% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

G ReuterKlinik und Poliklinik für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl-Neuberg-Strasse 1, 30625, Hannover. Reuter.Guenter@mh-hannover.de
C Krauth
T Lenarz
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

At last, newborn hearing screening has arrived. Hearing screening is now obligatory in Germany from 01.01.2009. Is this a reason for happiness only or will it become in those regions which do not have a setup achieved by their own initiatives for an optimal basic structure for screening and tracking, a patchwork of unorganized implementation of newborn hearing screening? By using programming models for the improvement of early detection of hearing impairment for children, the profits and debts have been identified. Multidisciplinary working groups have updated and augmented the relevant questions. At the initial start of the first screening activities it became clear that early recognition of hearing impairment in children will only be effective when this has been done in an integrated network of appropriate facilities for diagnostics and therapeutics for treatment of hearing malfunctions in children. At present tracking measures are supported in only a few federal states, while in most others both responsibilities and funding have not been organized. Some relevant cost analyses might help to avoid the coarser meanders.

Indexed as

GermanyHearing DisordersHearing TestsHumansInfant, NewbornNeonatal Screening

Identifiers

PMID19145417
OpenAlexW40488997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.