Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39997154›Full record

ReviewAudiology research2025

Early Intervention for Hearing-Impaired Children-From Policy to Practice: An Integrative Review.

Luisa Petrocchi-Bartal, Katijah Khoza-Shangase, Amisha Kanji

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Audiology research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

3 authors.

Luisa Petrocchi-BartalDepartment of Speech Pathology and Audiology, Faculty of Humanities, School of Human and Community Development, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2050, South Africa.
Katijah Khoza-ShangaseDepartment of Speech Pathology and Audiology, Faculty of Humanities, School of Human and Community Development, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2050, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-6220-9606
Amisha KanjiDepartment of Speech Pathology and Audiology, Faculty of Humanities, School of Human and Community Development, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2050, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-9577-4935

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesGlobally, many countries have endorsed the World Health Organisation's (WHO) early intervention (EI) guidelines through their legislation with contextual variations. Sensitive evaluation of gaps within EI-recommended systems is essential, especially in the translation of policy into practice across high-income and low- to middle-income country (LMIC) contexts, including South Africa. The main objective was to explore and identify the current evidence reflecting the application of hearing-specific government policy regarding EI and early education (EE) for hearing-impaired/d/Deaf/hard-of-hearing (HI/D/HH) children aged six and below.

methodAn integrative review was conducted on peer-reviewed articles that examined policy in practice regarding EI for HI/D/HH children aged six and below. Studies were accessed via four databases (Ebscohost, Sabinet, Scopus, and ScienceDirect) and one search engine (Google Scholar) between 2014 and 2024. Qualitative evaluation ensued of themes identified deductively.

resultsTwenty-six peer-reviewed studies were included. Deductive thematic analysis revealed six derived themes: EI timing, early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI)/EI mechanisms; EI services, EE, family considerations, and policy. Five of the 26 directly scrutinised government policy in its EI/EE practical application. Articles reflected the need for consideration of the complex processes that allow for policy actualisation, such as adequate infrastructure and family considerations.

conclusionsA bottom-up approach to policy actualisation, with grass-roots contextual considerations such as EI access and caregiver concerns, may improve policy application. Current findings have implications, particularly for LMIC contexts including South Africa, where EI and EE policy scrutiny regarding hearing impairment/deafness specificity is imperative for understanding its application alignment.

Indexed as

deafearly interventionhard of hearinghearing impairmentpolicypractice

Identifiers

PMID39997154
PMCPMC11852310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.