Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40759178›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of perinatology2026

Timing of Newborn Hearing Screening Effects on Passing Rates: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Wongsathon Seehiranwong, Pichada Saengrat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of perinatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Wongsathon SeehiranwongDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Vajira Hospital, Navamindradhiraj University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pichada SaengratDepartment of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Vajira Hospital, Navamindradhiraj University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Newborn hearing screening using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) is essential for early detection of hearing impairment. The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing recommends screening near hospital discharge but does not specify an optimal timing. To determine the optimal timing for TEOAE screening in neonates at low risk of hearing impairment and to identify perinatal factors influencing pass rates.Neonates underwent sequential TEOAE screening based on postnatal age at the time of testing: less than 24, 24 to 36, 36 to 48, and more than 48 hours, with follow-up at 1 month for persistent failures. Statistical analyses included Fisher's exact test to compare pass rates across time intervals and multivariate Cox's proportional hazards regression and Laplace regression to assess factors associated with screening outcomes.Among 408 neonates, the median passing age was 23.8 hours (interquartile range: 14.3). Pass rates improved with later screening: 53.7% at less than 24 hours, 80.1% at 24 to 36 hours, 92.6% at 36 to 48 hours, and 99.3% at more than 48 hours. A significant improvement was observed only at more than 48 hours (odds ratio: 5.26;

Indexed as

Hearing LossHearing TestsNeonatal ScreeningOtoacoustic Emissions, SpontaneousFemaleGestational AgeHumansInfant, NewbornMaleMultivariate AnalysisProportional Hazards ModelsProspective StudiesTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID40759178
PMCPMC12995438

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.