ArticleInternational journal of critical illness and injury science
Screening for hearing loss using the electronic whisper test: A prospective cross-sectional study.
Article in International journal of critical illness and injury science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hearing screening is a method for early identification of hearing loss. Hearing screening is widely used in hospitals as part of physical examination. However, some of them are difficult to operate outside the hospitals regarding portability and user-friendliness. Therefore, we developed a simple yet easy-to-use portable electronic whisper test (EWT) for field deployment, particularly on many subjects. The EWT validity is a hearing screening method compared to pure-tone audiometry. Methods: This study was a cross-sectional comparative with a prospective approach. The subjects were outpatients at the Audiology Clinic of Dr. Soetomo Academic Medical Center, Surabaya, Indonesia, who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Statistical analysis made sensitivity and specificity tables using a 2 × 2 table, positive and negative predictive values. Results: Samples of 50 participants (100 ears) obtained a sensitivity value of 83%, specificity of 78%, positive predictive value of 45%, and negative predictive value of 95%. Conclusions: The EWT is valid for use as a hearing screening method.
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.