Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37154942›Full record

ArticleEuropean 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 Surgery2023

Referral rate and false-positive rates in a hearing screening program among high-risk newborns.

Kruthika Thangavelu, Kyriakos Martakis, Silke Feldmann, Bernhard Roth, Ruth Lang-Roth

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Developmental outcomes of small infants at a high-risk clinic: A short-term longitudinal study.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kruthika ThangaveluDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Marburg, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35043, Marburg, Germany. Kruthika.thangavelu@uk-gm.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5610-1535
Kyriakos MartakisDepartment of Pediatric Neurology, Social Pediatrics and Epileptology, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen and University Hospital Giessen, Feulgenstr. 10-12, 35392, Giessen, Germany.
Silke FeldmannDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Bernhard RothDepartment of Neonatology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Ruth Lang-RothDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Cologne, Kerpener Strasse 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
University of Cologne · DEJustus-Liebig-Universität Gießen · DEPhilipps University of Marburg · DEUniversity Hospital Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimMore studies exploring referral rates and false-positive rates are needed to make hearing screening programs in newborns better and cost-effective. Our aim was to study the referral and false-positivity rates among high-risk newborns in our hearing screening program and to analyze the factors potentially associated with false-positive hearing screening test results.

methodsA retrospective cohort study was done among the newborns hospitalized at a university hospital from January 2009 to December 2014 that underwent hearing screening with a two-staged AABR screening protocol. Referral rates and false-positivity rates were calculated and possible risk factors for false-positivity were analyzed.

results4512 newborns were screened for hearing loss in the neonatology department. The referral rate for the two-staged AABR-only screening was 3.8% with false-positivity being 2.9%. Our study showed that the higher the birthweight or gestational age of the newborn, the lower the odds of the hearing screening results being false-positive, and the higher the chronological age of the infant at the time of screening, the higher the odds of the results being false-positive. Our study did not show a clear association between the mode of delivery or gender and false-positivity.

conclusionAmong high-risk infants, prematurity and low-birthweight increased the rate of false-positivity in the hearing screening, and the chronological age at the time of the test seems to be significantly associated with false-positivity.

Indexed as

Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain StemNeonatal ScreeningBirth WeightHearingHumansInfantInfant, NewbornReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesAABRFalse-positivityHearing screeningHigh-risk newbornsNewborn

Identifiers

PMID37154942
PMCPMC10477105
OpenAlexW4375955892

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.