ArticlePloS one2026
Current clinical practices in pediatric audiology among audiologists in India.
Article in PloS one, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEvidence-based practice is central to audiology; however, adherence to best-practice guidelines varies, particularly in pediatric settings. This study explored current pediatric audiology practices among audiologists in India.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted using an adapted version of the American Board of Audiology's Pediatric Audiology Clinical Practice Analysis Survey modified for the Indian context. The survey was distributed electronically via email using contact information available with Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI). Eligible participants held at least a bachelor's degree in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology and had a minimum of one year of clinical experience. Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained, and confidentiality of responses was ensured. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed. Scale content validity index was calculated to assess content validity of the questionnaire.
resultsA total of 130 audiologists participated, representing a predominantly early-career workforce (mean experience = 4.92 ± 5.41 years). Core pediatric audiology procedures were widely practiced. Newborn hearing screening was considered very important by 66.2% of participants, while 35.4% performed it several times daily. Tympanometry was rated very important by 61.5%, with 40% performing it several times daily. Counselling-related practices were strongly emphasized, with 68.5% rating explanation of test results as very important and 48.5% performing it several times daily. In contrast, advanced procedures demonstrated lower utilization. Cortical evoked potentials were not performed by 35.4% of participants, vestibular assessments by 43.1%, cochlear implant programming by 45.4%, and bone conduction device management by 57.7%.
conclusionsIndian audiologists consistently provide essential pediatric audiology services; however, gaps persist in specialized diagnostics and rehabilitation. Enhancing infrastructure, professional training, and adherence to evidence-based guidelines is necessary to strengthen pediatric audiological care in India.
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.