ArticleJAMIA open2025
Application of the International Classification of Health Interventions for coding interventions in adults with sensorineural hearing loss.
Article in JAMIA open, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI), currently being developed, seeks to span all sectors of the health system. Our objective was to determine the coverage of the ICHI for hearing interventions commonly delivered to adults with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Material and Methods: A 3-phase content mapping method was used, which included (1) identification of source terms with an expert panel in audiology rehabilitation; (2) 3 coders independently applied the classification to the source terms; and (3) the coders reached a consensus for each intervention and identified reasons for initial discrepancies with options not linked to a specific code were identified. Results: Nineteen different ICHI Target categories were identified, with 23 different ICHI Action categories and 82% of the means being "Other and unspecified." There was consensus in codes for 54.3% of source terms, with no ICHI code found for 8.5% of source terms. The greatest number of discrepancies arose from the action, followed by the target. Coding discrepancies occurred as a result of misunderstanding of source terms, the clinical use thereof, and difficulty determining the type of Target. Discussion: Despite its broad scope, ICHI's current framework has gaps in its coverage of audiological interventions, particularly those related to sensorineural hearing loss. Addressing these gaps is crucial for improving global data standardization and facilitating the development of more targeted hearing health policies. Conclusion: This study makes an important contribution to the further development and refinement of the classification, specifically in the context of hearing healthcare.
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.