Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42052411›Full record

ReviewDigital health

A systematic review of mHealth-based paediatric hearing screening tools/devices.

Vishnu Saravana, Vidya Ramkumar, Arivudai Nambi Pitchaimuthu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Digital health. 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

3 authors.

Vishnu SaravanaDepartment of Audiology, Sri Ramachandra Faculty of Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, (Deemed to be University), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1132-2295
Vidya RamkumarDepartment of Audiology, Sri Ramachandra Faculty of Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, (Deemed to be University), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3590-6721
Arivudai Nambi PitchaimuthuDepartment of Audiology, All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysuru, Karnataka, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7399-5334

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Despite the proven effectiveness of traditional screening devices for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) programs, the costs of these instruments are high to be implemented as a sustainable solution for low- and middle-income countries. Mobile Health (mHealth) hearing screeners are an alternative solution to support EHDI programs. Therefore, demand is increasing for accessible, affordable and scalable alternatives. Objective: This review reports on the validity, costs, status (commercially available/non-commercially available) of the mHealth screeners available globally for the paediatric population. Method: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar was conducted. Articles published from 2014 and study populations of 0-18 years were eligible. Thirty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria, and 27 mHealth screeners were identified in this review. Results: Three objective screeners were identified, OAEBuds, hearOAE and off-the-shelf OAE. Twenty-four subjective screeners were identified, mainly using pure-tone audiometry, game-based tests and speech-in-noise tests. Subjective screeners target children above 3 years of age. Sensitivity and specificity were comparable to those of traditional screeners, although the validation methodologies varied. Only one objective screener is commercially available. Few screeners are available free of cost and as open-source software. Compared to previous reviews on mHealth devices, this review captured objective hearing screeners. Conclusion: The review outlined the need for more mHealth-based screeners for lower age groups, particularly for infants and toddlers, as most of the identified screeners catered to an older population of more than three years of age.

Indexed as

child healthgood health and well-beinginnovationmHealthpaediatric hearing screeners

Identifiers

PMID42052411
PMCPMC13111855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.