To evaluate existing literature on hearing screening outcomes and follow-through among the adult population in the US. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Ovid Medline, Scopus, and CINAHL databases. REVIEW
✦ The floor
Discussion
Signed responses from readers of the wire.
No immediate change to individual clinical practice, but the review highlights that follow-through rates and screening modality choice critically affect reach in underserved populations — clinicians working in community or outreach settings should note which modalities show stronger follow-through.
Addressing hearing-screening gaps in underserved US adults is essential for reducing hearing-loss-related health disparities at a population level.
- 01Scoping review focuses on hearing screening in underserved US adult populations.
- 02Evaluates multiple screening modalities (e.g., pure-tone, app-based, questionnaire-based).
- 03Examines follow-through rates — how often people get further testing or treatment after screening.
- 04Identifies social, geographic, and systemic determinants that affect access and uptake.
- 05Findings can inform community outreach program design and policy.
Hearing screening modality and follow-through rates vary significantly among underserved US adult populations.
studypartially supportedSocial determinants of health influence hearing screening access and outcomes in underserved adults.
studysupported- PMID
- 42847671
- DOI
- 10.1002/lary.70915.
- Journal
- The Laryngoscope
- Publication type
- review
- Evidence level
- 2a
- Population
- Underserved US adults undergoing hearing screening
- Intervention
- Hearing screening modalities in underserved populations
Primary outcomes
Hearing screening follow-through rates; Screening modalities used; Determinants of screening access and uptake
