Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36720503›Full record

SynthesisBMJ paediatrics open2023

Early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) programmes for infants and young children in low-income and middle-income countries in Asia: a systematic review.

Deepashree Joshi B, Vidya Ramkumar, Lekha S Nair, Hannah Kuper

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ paediatrics open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Newborn screening for hearing and sight, Cameroon.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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 2 countries.

Deepashree Joshi BSri Ramachandra Faculty of Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.ORCID 0000-0001-5232-9746
Vidya RamkumarSri Ramachandra Faculty of Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Chennai, Tamilnadu, India vidya.ramkumar@sriramachandra.edu.in.
Lekha S NairDepartment of Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, National Institute of Speech and Hearing, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India.
Hannah KuperDepartment of Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London, UK.
Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research · INLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

DBT-Wellcome Trust India Alliance IA/CPHI/19/1/504614
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) measures initiated in high-income countries (HICs) were attempted in low-income and middle-income countries (L&MICs). However, information regarding the models of EHDI, context-specific adaptations made to strategies and outcomes are not known.

aimsThe aims of this systematic review were to identify the various models of EHDI used in Asian L&MICs in the published scientific literature and to describe their efficacy and validity.

methodsThe studies were eligible if the programme was from Asian L&MICs, implemented for children below 6 years of age and published between 2010 and 2021. Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCOHost and EBSCO-CINAHL were used to find articles. Data were extracted from each selected article, and the risk of bias was assessed. The search results were summarised using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. For primary outcomes, narrative synthesis was used, and forest plots were generated for secondary outcomes.

resultsIn all, 82 studies were included, and these studies were divided into two categories: newborn and infant screening programmes and screening programmes for older children. Predominantly, a two-stage objective otoacoustic emission (Distortion Product/Transient Evoked) or automated auditory brainstem response screening, followed by a detailed auditory brainstem response to confirm the hearing loss, was used in newborn and infant screening programmes. Audiologists were the most frequent screening personnel. Screening of older children was mostly done by otolaryngologists, school instructors and nurses. They performed a single-stage pure tone audiometry screening followed by a detailed examination.

conclusionThe screening tools and protocols used were similar to those used in HICs. However, no uniform protocols were followed within each country. Long-term viability of EHDI programmes was not known as there was limited information on impact outcomes such as cost-benefit. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021240341.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesHearing LossAdolescentAsiaAudiometry, Pure-ToneChildChild, PreschoolHumansInfantInfant, NewbornOtoacoustic Emissions, SpontaneousAudiologyDeafnessHealth services researchNeonatology

Identifiers

PMID36720503
PMCPMC9890799
OpenAlexW4318714026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.