Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38904827›Full record

ArticleNoise & health

Effects of Natural Delivery and Cesarean Section on the Result of First Hearing Screening of Newborns.

Hui Fu, Feng Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Noise & health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Hui FuDepartment of Obstetrics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shaoyang University, Shaoyang 422000, Hunan, China.
Feng WangDepartment of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shaoyang University, Shaoyang 422000, Hunan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly detection and intervention of hearing issues in newborns are crucial for their auditory and speech development, necessitating newborn hearing screenings. This study aimed to investigate the impact of delivery methods, specifically natural delivery and cesarean section, on newborn hearing screening outcomes. METHODS AND MATERIAL: A retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 600 newborns delivered at The First Affiliated Hospital of Shaoyang University between January 2020 and January 2023. The initial hearing screenings used the AccuScreen otoacoustic emission instrument. The study examined the influence of delivery method on the pass rates of newborns' first hearing screenings within and beyond 48 h postbirth.

resultsThe pass rates for the initial hearing screenings, conducted within and after 48 h of birth, were significantly higher in the natural delivery group compared to the cesarean section group (P < 0.05). Furthermore, multivariate analysis identified the delivery method as a significant factor influencing the pass rates of newborns' first hearing screenings.

conclusionsThe mode of delivery appears to affect the results of the initial hearing screenings of newborns, though further research is needed to validate these findings.

Indexed as

Cesarean SectionHearing TestsNeonatal ScreeningDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHearing DisordersHumansInfant, NewbornMaleOtoacoustic Emissions, SpontaneousPregnancyRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID38904827
PMCPMC11530114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.