Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30374213›Full record

ReviewSeminars in hearing2018

Profound Hearing Loss: Addressing Barriers to Hearing Healthcare.

Sheila R Pratt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in hearing, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sheila R PrattGeriatric Research and Clinical Education Center, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The impact of profound hearing loss on infants and adults is variable and greatly influenced by improved audition derived from hearing aids and cochlear implants. However, barriers to healthcare, hearing healthcare in particular, can offset the benefits provided by these sensory devices. Common barriers include cost, location, availability of trained professionals, acceptance of the hearing loss, language and cultural differences, secondary disabilities, and mental health issues. These barriers and their distinct presentations vary somewhat by age, language, and where people live (urban vs. rural), and can interfere with receiving testing and devices in a timely manner. They also can limit auditory, speech and language therapies, and interfere with acceptance of the hearing loss and devices. Rehabilitation should focus on eliminating or reducing the adverse impact of these barriers on patients and their families. Some of which can be done through professional training and multidisciplinary activities, counseling, and community outreach.

Indexed as

barriershealthcarehearing lossrehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID30374213
PMCPMC6203460
OpenAlexW2898443431

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.