SynthesisAudiology & neuro-otology2024
Academic Outcomes with Hearing Amplification Devices in Children with Unilateral Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.
Synthesis in Audiology & neuro-otology, 2024. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMany studies have shown increased academic problems in children with unilateral hearing loss (UHL). However, whether hearing devices can ameliorate the educational difficulties associated with UHL is not well studied. Therefore, the objective of the current systematic review was to answer the question: do nonsurgical amplification devices, bone-anchored hearing aids, and/or cochlear implants improve academic outcomes in school-aged children and adolescents with UHL?
methodsEmbase, MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://ClinicalTrials.gov" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">ClinicalTrials.gov</ext-link>, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to December 21, 2022. Published, peer-reviewed studies comparing academic outcomes in patients with UHL aged ≥5 and ≤19 years with and without hearing devices (nonsurgical amplification devices, bone-anchored hearing aids, or cochlear implants) were included. Results of studies were qualitatively synthesized, and the risk of bias was evaluated with the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool.
resultsA total of 5,644 non-duplicate publications were identified by the search, and four studies were included for synthesis, every one of which was investigating nonsurgical amplification. One small, single-arm study demonstrated significant improvement in subjective classroom listening difficulties after a 3- to 4-month trial with a behind-the-ear hearing aid. The other three studies of nonsurgical amplification devices showed no benefit across multiple academic outcomes with FM systems and conventional and CROS-style hearing aids. DISCUSSION: The small sample sizes, heterogeneous and/or ill-defined study samples, and overall low quality of the available literature ultimately make it hard to draw definitive conclusions regarding nonsurgical amplification devices' effectiveness in improving academic outcomes in children with UHL. No articles were identified that studied cochlear implants or bone-anchored hearing aids. Further studies with high-quality study design, large sample sizes, and long-term follow-up are needed to answer this clinically important question.
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.