ArticleInternational journal of pediatrics2021
Emerging Data from a Newborn Hearing Screening Program in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.
Article in International journal of pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality measures of two-stage newborn hearing screening: systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Current Status of Newborn Bloodspot Screening Worldwide 2024: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Activities (2020-2023).International journal of neonatal screening · 2024Review
- Follow-up of children diagnosed with deafness in a neonatal hearing screening program in Manaus.Revista de saude publica · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesNewborn hearing screening (NHS) plays a critical role in early identification of hearing loss and subsequent early habilitation. Active parental involvement influences the success of NHS, particularly the initial NHS and follow-up. The current study reports the results of an NHS program in a cohort of babies born in a tertiary care hospital in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates (UAE). Further, it explores a two-stage NHS model to reduce false responses, thereby alleviating parental anxiety.
methodsRetrospective observational study was conducted for a period of five years from January 2017 to December 2020. NHS was done as a two-stage model. All the healthy newborn babies were screened using Automated Auditory Brainstem Response (AABR) by trained audiology professionals. Babies who failed the first NHS were followed up after two weeks. Further, babies that failed the follow-up NHS were sent for diagnostic hearing evaluation and intervention as necessary.
resultsA total of 1821 newborn babies were screened during the study period. Eighty-one percent of babies passed the initial NHS. Four hundred and twenty-three (23.22%) babies were referred on the first NHS and were followed up after 2 weeks. Among these babies, 7.03% (24) failed second NHS. Nine (37.50%) of the 24 babies were confirmed to have hearing loss in both ears. The incidence of hearing loss in our cohort was 4.94 per 1000. Confirmed hearing loss was statistically higher in boys than girls (
conclusionCurrent study was an attempt to report the emerging NHS data as part of the implementation of an NHS program. The study findings emphasize the need for a two-stage model of NHS to rule out false responses.
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.