ArticleAnnals of family medicine
Implementation of a Hearing Loss Screening Intervention in Primary Care.
Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes of a Large-Scale Pilot Hearing Screening Program at an Academic Medical Center.American journal of medicine open · 2026Article
- Factors associated with responses to hearing screening questions among older adults.American journal of medicine open · 2026Article
- Understanding Primary Care Providers' Attitudes and Practices for Hearing Loss Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2025Article
- Routine Hearing Screening for Older Adults in Primary Care: Insights of Patients and Clinic Personnel.The Gerontologist · 2024Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice of General Practitioners Toward Screening of Age-Related Hearing Loss in Community: A Cross-Sectional Study in Shanghai, China.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Surgeons' Perspectives on Changing the Default Number of Doses for Opioid Prescriptions in Electronic Health Record Systems.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Reframing Our Health Care System for Patients With Hearing Loss.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2022Review
- A pragmatic clinical trial of hearing screening in primary care clinics: cost-effectiveness of hearing screening.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHearing loss (HL) is underdiagnosed and often unaddressed. A recent study of screening for HL using an electronic prompt showed efficacy in increasing appropriate referrals for subsequent testing. We build on the results of this study using a qualitative lens to explore implementation processes through the perspectives of family medicine clinicians.
methodsWe collected clinic observations and semistructured interviews of family medicine clinicians and residents who interacted with the HL prompt. All data were analyzed using thematic, framework, and mixed methods integration strategies.
resultsWe interviewed 27 clinicians and conducted 10 observations. Thematic analysis resulted in 6 themes: (1) the prompt was overwhelmingly viewed as easy, simple to use, accurate; (2) clinicians considered prompt as an effective way to increase awareness and conversations with patients about HL; (3) clinician and staff buy-in played a vital role in implementation; (4) clinicians prioritized prompt during annual visits; (5) medical assistant involvement in prompt workflow varied by health system, clinic, and clinician; (6) prompt resulted in more conversations about HL, but uncertain impact on patient outcomes. Themes are presented alongside constructs of normalization process theory and intervention outcomes.
conclusionIntegration of a HL screening prompt into clinical practice varied by clinician buy-in and beliefs about the impact on patient outcomes, involvement of medical assistants, and prioritization during clinical visits. Further research is needed to understand how to leverage clinician and staff buy-in and whether implementation of a new clinical prompt has sustained impact on HL screening and patient outcomes.
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.