ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Audiology2019
Hearing Screening in the Community.
Article in Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consumer preferences for hearing health care information and services as described by older adults surveyed in Australia, Canada, England, and the United States.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Study protocol: feasibility of a hearing program in primary care for underserved older adults.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- Predictors of hearing screening among residents of Saudi Arabia at primary healthcare settings in Riyadh: useful insights from a cross-sectional survey.BMC public health · 2025Article
- A cross-sectional study on the burden of visual and hearing impairment using WHO eyes and hear WHOpro applications among professional degree college students, Bengaluru Urban.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
- Hearing health survey of the population in Bangkok.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Model-Projected Cost-Effectiveness of Adult Hearing Screening in the USA.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Screening strategy and time points for newborn hearing re-screening with high risk factors.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2022Article
- Increasing obstructive sleep apnea risk is associated with hearing impairment in middle-aged Chinese men-A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2022Article
- Construction and Evaluation of a High-Frequency Hearing Loss Screening Tool for Community Residents.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Sensitivity and Specificity of Pure-Tone and Subjective Hearing Screenings Using Spanish-Language Questions.American journal of audiology · 2020Article
- Development of a hearing help-seeking questionnaire based on the theory of planned behavior.International journal of audiology · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdults typically wait 7-10 yr after noticing hearing problems before seeking help, possibly because they are unaware of the extent of their impairment. Hearing screenings, frequently conducted at health fairs, community events, and retirement centers can increase this awareness. To our knowledge, there are no published studies in which testing conditions and outcomes have been examined for multiple "typical screening events." PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to report hearing screening outcomes for pure tones and self-report screening tests and to examine their relationship with ambient noise levels in various screening environments. STUDY SAMPLE: One thousand nine hundred fifty-four individuals who completed a hearing screening at one of 191 community-based screening events that took place in the Portland, OR, and Tampa, FL, metro areas. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The data were collected during the recruitment phase of a large multisite study. All participants received a hearing screening that consisted of otoscopy, pure-tone screening, and completion of the Hearing Handicap Inventory-Screening Version (HHI-S). In addition, ambient sound pressure levels were measured just before pure-tone testing.
resultsMany more individuals failed the pure-tone screening (n = 1,238) and then failed the HHI-S (n = 796). The percentage of individuals who failed the pure-tone screening increased linearly with age from <20% for ages <45 yr to almost 100% for individuals aged ≥85 yr. On the other hand, the percentage of individuals who failed the HHI-S remained unchanged at approximately 40% for individuals aged ≥55 yr. Ambient noise levels varied considerably across the hearing screening locations. They impacted the pure-tone screen failure rate but not the HHI-S failure rate.
conclusionsIt is important to select screening locations with a quiet space for pure-tone screening, use headphones with good passive attenuation, measure sound levels regularly during hearing screening events, halt testing if ambient noise levels are high, and/or alert individuals to the possibility of a false-positive screening failure. The data substantiate prior findings that the relationship between pure-tone sensitivity and reported hearing loss changes with age. Although it might be possible to develop age-specific HHI-S failure criteria to adjust for this, such an endeavor is not recommended because perceived difficulties are the best predictor of hearing health behaviors. Instead, it is proposed that a public health focus on education about hearing and hearing loss would be more effective.
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.