Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35447740›Full record

ArticleAudiology research2022

Audiologist's Perspective in Auditory Rehabilitation: Implications for Ethical Conduct and Decision-Making in Portugal.

Tatiana Marques, Margarida Silvestre, Bárbara Santa Rosa, António Miguéis

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Audiology research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 48% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tatiana MarquesCIBIT-Coimbra Institute for Biomedical Imaging and Translational Research, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-4603-8525
Margarida SilvestreInstitute of Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-0659-9435
Bárbara Santa RosaInstitute of Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal.
António MiguéisClinic of Otorhinolaryngology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3004-531 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-2949-8562
University of Coimbra · PTUniversidade do Porto · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ethical standards in audiology have been continuously improved and discussed, leading to the elaboration of specific regulatory guidelines for the profession. However, in the field of auditory rehabilitation, audiologists are still faced with circumstances that question their ethical principles, usually associated with the support of the hearing aids industry. The study explores the decision-making process and ethical concerns in auditory rehabilitation as they relate to the practice of audiology in Portugal. An online questionnaire constructed by the authors was used and sent to the email addresses of a list of audiologists, registered with the Portuguese Association of Audiologists. The questionnaire was answered by 93 audiologists with clinical experience in auditory rehabilitation for more than one year. The collected data demonstrated that audiometric results and clinical experience are the most important factors for decision-making in auditory rehabilitation practice. Moreover, incentives from the employers or manufacturers were identified as the main cause of ethical dilemmas. This study highlights the ethical concerns regarding the clinical practice of auditory rehabilitation in Portugal, revealing that the decision-making process is complex and, specifically in this field, the current practice may not be adequate for effective compliance with professional ethical standards.

Indexed as

audiologyauditory rehabilitationdecision-makingethicethical dilemmas

Identifiers

PMID35447740
PMCPMC9028603
OpenAlexW4220732227

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.