Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27004530›Full record

ArticleBMC pediatrics2016

The HI HOPES data set of deaf children under the age of 6 in South Africa: maternal suspicion, age of identification and newborn hearing screening.

Claudine Störbeck, Alys Young

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pediatrics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A call for linguistic and culturally congruent family-centred early hearing detection and intervention programmes in South Africa.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2024
    Article
  9. Analysis of barriers and facilitators to early hearing detection and intervention in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Communication and school readiness abilities of children with hearing impairment in South Africa: A retrospective review of early intervention preschool records.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2019
    Article
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Claudine StörbeckCentre for Deaf Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Wozani Building, Education Campus, 27 St Andrew's Road, Parktown, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Alys YoungSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Jean McFarlane Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, UK. alys.young@manchester.ac.uk.
University of Manchester · GBUniversity of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIdentification of deafness before 3 months of age substantially improves the socio-linguistic and cognitive development of deaf children. Existing studies demonstrating the feasibility of newborn hearing screening in South Africa have used small samples unrepresentative of general population characteristics. This study establishes the characteristics of the largest data set of deaf infants and their families in South Africa on which there is baseline and longitudinal data (n = 532); explores its representativeness in terms of socio-demographic features and reports on access to and quality of newborn hearing screening within the sample. It examines specifically the relationship between age of maternal suspicion of childhood deafness and age of identification of deafness by cohort characteristics.

methodsSecondary analysis, using descriptive and inferential statistics, of a pre-existing longitudinal data set (n = 532) of deaf infants under 6 years of age, and their families, collected as routine monitoring of the HI HOPES (HH) early intervention programme.

resultsThe HH cohort is representative in terms of racial profile and private/public health care use but displays slightly higher level of maternal education and slightly lower socio-economic status than national comparators. 102 out of 532 infants had undergone newborn hearing screening, resulting in 29 true positives, 15 of whom would have met the criteria for targeted screening. Later onset deafness does not account for the 73 false negatives. The median age of maternal suspicion (n = 247) of infant deafness was 18 months; the median age of identification of 28 months. Age of identification was unrelated to private/public health care status. The median delay between age of suspicion and age of identification was significantly longer in the public sector (7 m; IQR 0-15 m) compared to the private sector (2 m; IQR 0-8.5 m) (p = 0.035). Age of suspicion was unrelated to level of maternal education. Earlier age of suspicion did not predict earlier identification.

conclusionTargeted screening as timely response to maternal suspicion offers a viable means to reduce substantially the age of identification of deafness in South Africa until implementation of newborn hearing screening on a population-wide basis can be justified.

Indexed as

Neonatal ScreeningAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolDatabases, FactualDeafnessEarly DiagnosisEarly Intervention, EducationalFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInfantInfant, NewbornLongitudinal StudiesMaleAge of identificationDeaf infantsMaternal suspicionNewborn hearing screeningSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID27004530
PMCPMC4804475
OpenAlexW2309108409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.