Trial reportEar and hearing
Hearing Screening in Older Adults in Primary Care Clinics: How the Effects of Setting and Provider Encouragement Differ by Patient Sex and Race.
Trial report in Ear and hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes of a Large-Scale Pilot Hearing Screening Program at an Academic Medical Center.American journal of medicine open · 2026Article
- Factors associated with responses to hearing screening questions among older adults.American journal of medicine open · 2026Article
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
objectivesFew studies have examined how patient sex or race influence hearing healthcare, which was our study purpose.
designWe performed a secondary analysis using data from a pragmatic clinical trial that examined the effect of provider encouragement (yes/no) or setting (at-home/clinic) for older adults to follow through with routine hearing screening in primary care and the hearing healthcare pathway. Three protocols were compared: at-home screening without provider encouragement, at-home screening with provider encouragement, and in-clinic screening with provider encouragement.
resultsPoisson regression (n = 627) showed few differences by patient sex but showed that Black patients in the at-home protocols were less likely to schedule or complete a formal diagnostic evaluation after a failed screening compared with Black patients in the clinic setting and White patients in all groups. Black patients, regardless of provider encouragement, were less likely to schedule or complete a diagnostic evaluation compared with White patients.
conclusionsResults suggest that in-clinic screenings may increase the use of hearing healthcare for Black patients.
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.