ReviewTrends in amplification
A critical review of audiological outcome measures for infants and children.
Review in Trends in amplification. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- A scoping review of arabic self-reported measures of hearing, tinnitus and hyperacusis: Limited quality and quantity.Saudi medical journal · 2025Article
- Article
- Outcomes and device use in children with bone-conduction hearing devices in South Africa.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2024Article
- Audiological characteristics of children with congenital unilateral hearing loss: insights into Age of reliable behavioural audiogram acquisition and change of hearing loss.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Speech Discrimination in Infancy Predicts Language Outcomes at 30 Months for Both Children with Normal Hearing and Those with Hearing Differences.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- An Adaptation and Validation Study of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ) in Italian Normal-Hearing Children.Audiology research · 2022Article
- Comprehensive Audiological Management of Hearing Loss in Children, Including Mild and Unilateral Hearing Loss.Otolaryngologic clinics of North America · 2021Review
- Early pediatric Cochlear implantation: An update.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2021Review
- Modification and verification of the Infant-Toddler Meaningful Auditory Integration Scale: a psychometric analysis combining item response theory with classical test theory.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2020Article
- [Common tools of auditory function assessment in infants and toddlers].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2020Article
- Early prelingual auditory development in Italian infants and toddlers analysed through the Italian version of the Infant-Toddler Meaningful Auditory Integration Scale (IT-MAIS).European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2018Article
- Using Rasch Analysis to Examine the Item-Level Psychometrics of theSpeech, language and hearing (London, England) · 2017Article
- Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials Reveal Changes in Audibility with Nonlinear Frequency Compression in Hearing Aids for Children: Clinical Implications.Seminars in hearing · 2016Article
- Consumer preferences for hearing aid attributes: a comparison of rating and conjoint analysis methods.Trends in amplification · 2012Article
- Slow cortical potentials and amplification-part I: n1-p2 measures.International journal of otolaryngology · 2012Article
- Daily-Life Fatigue Among Adolescents Who Are Hard of Hearing: An Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.Ear and hearingArticle
- Knowledge translation in audiology: promoting the clinical application of best evidence.Trends in amplificationReview
- Article
- Linguistic input, electronic media, and communication outcomes of toddlers with hearing loss.Ear and hearingArticle
- Developmental Trajectories and Influencing Factors of Aural/Oral Performance in Mandarin-Speaking Children with Cochlear Implants Using the PEACH Scale.Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Outcome evaluation is an important stage in the pediatric hearing aid fitting process, however a systematic way of evaluating outcome in the pediatric audiology population is lacking. This is in part due to the need for an evidence-based outcome evaluation guideline for infants and children with hearing loss who wear hearing aids. As part of the development of a guideline, a critical review of the existing pediatric audiology outcome evaluation tools was conducted. Subjective outcome evaluation tools that measure auditory-related behaviors in children from birth to 6 years of age were critically appraised using a published grading system (Andresen, 2000). Of the tools that exist, 12 were appraised because they met initial criteria outlined by the Network of Pediatric Audiologists of Canada as being appropriate for children birth to 6 years of age who wear hearing aids. Tools that were considered for the guideline scored high in both statistical and feasibility criteria. The subjective outcome evaluation tools that were ultimately chosen to be included in the guideline were the LittlEARS Auditory Questionnaire (Tsiakpini et al., 2004) and the Parents' Evaluation of Aural/Oral Performance of Children (PEACH) Rating Scale (Ching & Hill, 2005b) due to the high grades they received in the critical review and their target age ranges. Following this critical review of pediatric outcome evaluation tools, the next step was for the Network Clinicians to evaluate the guideline (Moodie et al., 2011b).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.