SynthesisBMC medicine2026
Detection of hearing loss by formal audiological testing after acute infectious meningitis: a global systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcute community-acquired bacterial meningitis remains a significant global health concern with significant mortality and morbidity, including neurological sequelae such as sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Early detection of meningitis-associated SNHL mitigates permanent deafness and poor outcomes, including cognitive decline, social isolation, and mental health disorders. This systematic review evaluates the optimal time point(s) to perform formal audiological diagnostic testing and follow-up in adult and pediatric meningitis patients to effectively detect hearing loss (HL) outcomes.
methodsA literature search was conducted across Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Studies reporting the time frames for HL detection secondary to acute meningitis using formal audiological tests were included. Data were analyzed descriptively for continuous and categorical variables. A meta-analysis calculated the pooled prevalence of outcomes, with subgroup analyses stratified by the time frame of audiological diagnostic assessment.
resultsA total of 41 studies were included, with n = 8105 meningitis patients comprising n = 1397 (17.2%) adults and 6708 (82.8%) children. In adults, most audiological testing occurred post-discharge (n = 530 vs. n = 145), yet the proportion of hearing loss diagnoses was higher before discharge than after (45.5% vs. 42.5%). Similarly, more audiological assessments were administered post-discharge compared to pre-discharge (n = 3340 vs. n = 1975) in children, but HL diagnoses were more frequent before discharge (33.9% vs. 25.3%). The pooled prevalence of HL diagnoses during hospitalization or at discharge was 30.4% (95% CI 22.9-38%), compared to 22.9% (95% CI 12.6-33.1%) within 1 month post-discharge, 20.3% (95% CI 8.8-31.9%) between 30 and 60 days post-discharge, 22.7% (95% CI 12.1-33.4%) between 60 and 180 days post-discharge, and 10.8% (95% CI 5.9-15.7%) more than 180 days after discharge.
conclusionsThe considerable variability in the time frame of audiological test administration following an acute meningitis episode highlights the need for standardized auditory evaluations after meningitis diagnosis. Our findings emphasize that as hearing loss may occur and recover at different stages after an infectious meningitis episode, coordinated hearing assessments at discharge and during follow-up are important to ensure adequate detection and care.
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.