Hearing loss prevention programme vs audiometric testing (hearing loss): Hearing loss STS ≥ 10 dB hearing loss average over 2, 3, 4 kHz in either ear
Hearing loss prevention programme showed no clear difference in hearing loss STS ≥ 10 dB loss average over 2, 3, 4 kHz in either ear compared with audiometric testing (hearing loss) (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Hearing loss prevention programme vs audiometric testing (hearing loss) Hearing loss STS ≥ 10 dB loss average over 2, 3, 4 kHz in either ear · agricultural students without hearing loss Hearing loss prevention programme showed no clear difference in hearing loss STS ≥ 10 dB loss average over 2, 3, 4 kHz in either ear compared with audiometric testing (hearing loss) (moderate certainty). Interventions to prevent occupational noise‐induced hearing loss (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 0.85 [0.29, 2.44] | 1 study · 687 participants | Moderate |
Hearing loss prevention programme vs audiometric testing (hearing loss) Hearing loss STS ≥ 10 dB hearing loss average over 2, 3, 4 kHz in either ear · agricultural students without hearing loss Hearing loss prevention programme showed no clear difference in hearing loss STS ≥ 10 dB hearing loss average over 2, 3, 4 kHz in… compared with audiometric testing (hearing loss) (moderate certainty). Interventions to prevent occupational noise‐induced hearing loss (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 0.94 [0.46, 1.91] | 1 study · 355 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions to prevent occupational noise‐induced hearing loss 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.