ArticleBMC pediatrics2021
Perinatal factors influencing the neonatal hearing screening results.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hidden and Delayed-Onset Hearing Loss in Children: Limitations of Newborn Hearing Screening and Future Directions.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Timing of Newborn Hearing Screening Effects on Passing Rates: A Prospective Cohort Study.American journal of perinatology · 2026Article
- Nonlinear associations of birth weight and gestational age with initial newborn hearing screening referral in a large Chinese neonatal cohort.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Targeting risk factors for false-positive outcomes in newborn hearing screening: a focus on mode of delivery - a case-control study.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 · 2025Article
- Risk of Hearing Loss in Neonates and Toddlers with in Utero Exposure to SARS-CoV-2.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Referral rate and false-positive rates in a hearing screening program among high-risk newborns.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 · 2023Article
- Prevalence of Hearing Impairment in High-Risk Neonates at Kalaburagi Region of Northern Karnataka: A Hospital-Based Cross-Sectional Study.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2023Article
- Maternal and Neonatal Risk Factors for Special or Intensive Neonatal Care Admission: A Hospital-Based Cross-Sectional Study in Indonesia.Sage open pediatricsArticle
- Effects of Natural Delivery and Cesarean Section on the Result of First Hearing Screening of Newborns.Noise & healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have indicated that the majority of cases with "failed" results related to transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (OAE) test have the normal hearing. The present study aimed to assess the possible relationships between perinatal factors and the false-positive OAE results.
methodsA case-control study was carried out in an Iranian Hospital in 2020. Based on the OAE results on the first day of life, newborns were divided into 2 groups; Control group included subjects with "Pass" OAE results. Every neonate with "Fail" OAE result was referred for auditory brainstem response (ABR). Neonates with bilateral fail OAE but normal ABR results (false-positive OAE) were considered as the case group. All recorded data were analyzed to assess the possible correlations between maternal/neonatal factors and the false-positive OAE results.
resultsOne hundred and eighty-one neonates entered the study. Of all included neonates, 87 (48.1%) cases showed bilateral fail OAE and 94 (51.9%) subjects passed the OAE test. Normal ABR results (false-positive OAE) were observed in all cases with bilateral fail OAE. Comparisons of variables affecting the OAE results showed that of all perinatal factors, neonate's sex (p = 0.046) and cesarean section (p = 0.003) were the only influencing factors that increased the risk of false-positive OAE results.
conclusionBased on the results, the cesarean section delivery and neonate's male sex increased the risk of false-positive results related to OAE test. Implementing other screening tests such as ABR or Automated ABR as the initial screening test could be suggested for such cases.
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.