ArticleAmerican journal of audiology2024
Alignment of Audiologists' Values With Best-Practice Standards: Insights From a National Survey.
Article in American journal of audiology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPrevious research documented the values of audiology through a qualitative content analysis of documents representing traditional, best-practice hearing health care. The primary objective of this study was to validate the existing list of audiology values. Through a nationwide survey, this study aimed to elicit the values of practicing audiologists, with a specific focus on the prescription and dispensing of amplification devices, to ensure a comprehensive understanding of their priorities. Additionally, this study sought to identify any values missing from the original list and determine the rank order importance of these values, comparing this to the prioritization of values found in best-practice audiology documents. This comparison aimed to assess the alignment of recommended guidelines and real-world practices in hearing health care.
designAn online survey was distributed to audiologists to elicit the prioritization of values from hearing health care providers. Participants were tasked with sorting and ranking 18 items, each representing a specific value in hearing health care, based on importance. Respondents were encouraged to suggest and rank the importance of additional values not included in the list. Audiologists were recruited from professional association mailing lists and direct contact. Respondent demographics were representative of U.S. audiologists. Qualitative content analysis was used to interpret values suggested by audiologists. Kendall's rank distance test was used to compare values prioritization between audiologists and best-practice audiology documents.
resultsAfter filtering out incomplete or disqualifying responses, data from 289 audiologists across 46 states were analyzed. Additional values suggested by respondents aligned with existing values from best-practice documents; thus, no new values were added as a result of this study. A ranked list of values based on mean order of importance was elicited from U.S.-based audiologists. There was substantial agreement between survey results and the rank order of values found in best-practice audiology documents. A demographic subgroup analysis revealed a broad agreement among audiologists in the rank order of values.
conclusionsThis study validated a comprehensive list of values in audiology and identified the rank order of values among a nationally representative sample of audiologists. The findings provide a foundation for future investigations into how these values influence decision-making processes for individuals with hearing difficulty. Addressing values conflicts as potential barriers to hearing health care usage can lead to solutions aligned with values of specific populations, ultimately improving the adoption and effectiveness of hearing health care interventions. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.27478149.
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.