ArticleCoDAS2026
Hearing assessment of infants with congenital syphilis.
Article in CoDAS, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the presence of hearing loss in the first months of life in infants treated for congenital syphilis at birth.
methodsProspective study including all neonates born in a University public hospital in South Brazil, who needed treatment for congenital syphilis after birth in the Neonatal Unit, between 2021 and 2022. Otorhinolaryngologic and audiologic evaluations were performed at a mean age of 3.3 months, concomitantly with the first post-discharge appointment in the congenital syphilis outpatient clinic, through frequency-specific auditory brainstem response.
resultsSixty-five patients were included in the study. All subjects underwent Neonatal Hearing Screening before being discharged from the hospital, consisting of transient evoked otoacoustic emission and automated auditory brainstem response tests. Sixty-one patients (93.8%) passed both screening tests and four (6.2%) failed both tests. Concerning the 4 newborns who failed, 2 returned for retesting and had normal results, 1 patient did not show up for retesting, and 1 patient failed both retests. Follow-up was concluded by 23 infants (35.4% of the initial sample) who underwent Frequency-Specific Auditory Brainstem Response testing. The other patients did not attend to the appointments. Regarding the 23 patients that concluded the follow-up, no interaural response asymmetries suggestive of retrocochlear involvement were observed. Additionally, no changes were found in the absolute latencies of waves I, III, and V, or in the interpeak intervals I-III, III-V, and I-V. The Frequency-Specific Auditory Brainstem Response evaluation did not present any abnormalities in the electrophysiological thresholds at the tested frequencies.
conclusionNo signs of hearing loss were found in patients treated for congenital syphilis during neonatal period, either in the Neonatal Hearing Screening or in the Frequency-Specific Auditory Brainstem Response during follow-up.
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.