International journal of audiology · 2026
Degree-based and functional descriptions of paediatric hearing loss: a retrospective chart review.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sapp Caitlin, Duplain Allison, McCreery Ryan W, Brennhofer Karen, Walker Elizabeth A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The report from a paediatric audiology assessment is a lasting record of clinical events and a channel for sharing information about hearing loss, but we lack information about current practices in this area.
DESIGN: We completed a retrospective chart review from infants with congenital hearing loss.
STUDY SAMPLE: We analysed 374 reports to investigate how audiologists described hearing loss using a closed category set based on the level of descriptive information provided. We also analysed which child-level and clinic-level factors predict a report category.
RESULTS: Most reports described hearing loss using degree-based descriptions only (n = 238, 63.6%). Reports describing implications of hearing loss (n = 99, 26.5%) were 2.34 times more likely to have come from a paediatric facility compared to a lifespan facility (95% CI = 1.9-6.4). Overall, the writing in reports exceeded reading level recommendations for those with low literacy (average reading grade level 11.56 [SD = 1.39] indicating difficult-very difficult).
CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals variability in how audiologists describe infant hearing loss after diagnosis. Audiologists in paediatric facilities include functional descriptions more often in their clinical reports than audiologists in lifespan practices. Overall, reports may be challenging for families to read and use to develop a care plan.
DESIGN: We completed a retrospective chart review from infants with congenital hearing loss.
STUDY SAMPLE: We analysed 374 reports to investigate how audiologists described hearing loss using a closed category set based on the level of descriptive information provided. We also analysed which child-level and clinic-level factors predict a report category.
RESULTS: Most reports described hearing loss using degree-based descriptions only (n = 238, 63.6%). Reports describing implications of hearing loss (n = 99, 26.5%) were 2.34 times more likely to have come from a paediatric facility compared to a lifespan facility (95% CI = 1.9-6.4). Overall, the writing in reports exceeded reading level recommendations for those with low literacy (average reading grade level 11.56 [SD = 1.39] indicating difficult-very difficult).
CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals variability in how audiologists describe infant hearing loss after diagnosis. Audiologists in paediatric facilities include functional descriptions more often in their clinical reports than audiologists in lifespan practices. Overall, reports may be challenging for families to read and use to develop a care plan.