ArticleJournal of immigrant and minority health2026
Examining Audiometric Screening Outcomes in Non-Native English-Speaking Pediatric Patients.
Article in Journal of immigrant and minority health, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early identification of hearing loss through screening, such as pure-tone audiometry, is a crucial aspect of preventive pediatric care that helps minimize negative developmental outcomes. However, non-native English-speaking (NNES) children, often immigrants or children of immigrant families, encounter systemic barriers in healthcare that limit their access to recommended screenings. This study is the first to investigate the differences in audiometric screening adherence and outcomes between NNES and native English-speaking (NES) children. Using a retrospective cohort analysis, demographic and audiometric screening data were collected from 176 patients (88 NNES and 88 NES) during well-child checks (WCC) at ages four, five, six, and eight at an academic outpatient pediatric clinic in the United States. Statistical analyses compared adherence to recommended hearing screenings between the two groups. Both NNES and NES groups had a mean age of 10.8 years (p = 0.83), shared similar insurance coverage, and had a balanced sex distribution. The non-English languages represented included Nepali (40%), Mai-Mai (11%), and Swahili (8%). Our findings showed that NNES children had lower audiometric screening rates at the four-year WCC (p = 0.04) and the six-year WCC (p = 0.04). No disparities were found in screening failure rates or referral rates to audiologists or pediatric otolaryngologists. Implementing targeted cultural competency interventions could help reduce implicit provider bias and improve hearing screening practices. The variability in adherence to hearing screening during attended WCC visits and test frequencies used underscores the necessity for more standardized and universally adopted guidelines for pediatric hearing screens at pediatric clinics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41686302What 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.