ArticleCoDAS2026
A survey of strategies for the early diagnosis of hearing loss in infants: a scoping review.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo map the strategies used for the early diagnosis of hearing loss in infants. RESEARCH STRATEGIES: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, LILACS, Google Scholar, and ProQuest, with no restrictions on language or publication period. The search was initially performed in October 2024 and updated in January 2026. Controlled descriptors (DeCS/MeSH) and keywords related to hearing loss, newborn hearing screening, and early diagnosis were used. The protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework. SELECTION CRITERIA: Primary studies addressing strategies for the early diagnosis of hearing loss in children up to two years of age were included. Secondary studies, case reports, guidelines, duplicate publications, and studies without full-text availability were excluded. Study selection was performed independently by reviewers, with disagreements resolved by consensus. DATA ANALYSIS: Extracted data included study design, population, diagnostic instruments, strategies, and care setting. A descriptive and narrative synthesis was conducted, grouping evidence according to diagnostic approaches.
resultsOf the 16,946 records identified, 58 studies published between 1991 and 2025 met the eligibility criteria. Universal Newborn Hearing Screening (UNHS) predominated, particularly protocols combining otoacoustic emissions and automated auditory brainstem response. Complementary strategies included two-stage screening, early retesting, community-based programs, genetic screening, and additional electrophysiological assessments. Variability in protocol implementation and persistent structural inequalities were observed.
conclusionUNHS remains the cornerstone of early diagnosis of hearing loss in infants, with effectiveness dependent on well-organized care pathways and integration between screening, diagnosis, and 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.