Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 450

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Screening and Management of Adult Hearing Loss in Primary Care: Scientific Review

Yueh, Bevan, Shapiro, Nina, MacLean, Catherine H., Shekelle, Paul G.·2003·JAMA

Abstract

Context: Hearing loss is the third most prevalent chronic condition in olderadults and has important effects on their physical and mental health. Despitethese effects, most older patients are not assessed or treated for hearingloss. Objective: To review the evidence on screening and management of hearing loss ofolder adults in the primary care setting. Data Sources and Study Selection: We performed a search from 1985 to 2001 using MEDLINE, HealthSTAR, EMBASE,Ageline, and the National Guideline Clearinghouse for articles and practiceguidelines about screening and management of hearing loss in older adults,as well as reviewed references in these articles and those suggested by expertsin hearing impairment. Data Extraction: We reviewed articles for the most clinically important information,emphasizing randomized clinical trials, where available, and identified 1595articles. Data Synthesis: Screening tests that reliably detect hearing loss are use of an audioscope,a hand-held combination otoscope and audiometer, and a self-administered questionnaire,the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly-Screening version. The valueof routine screening for improving patient outcomes has not been evaluatedin a randomized clinical trial. Screening is endorsed by most professionalorganizations, including the US Preventive Services Task Force. While mosthearing loss in older adults is sensorineural and due to presbycusis, cerumenimpaction and chronic otitis media may be present in up to 30% of elderlypatients with hearing loss and can be treated by the primary care clinician.In randomized trials, hearing aids have been demonstrated to improve outcomesfor patients with sensorineural hearing loss. Nonadherence to use of hearingaids is high. Prompt recognition of potentially reversible causes of hearingloss, such as sudden sensorineural hearing loss, is important to maximizethe possibility of functional recovery. Conclusion: While untested in a clinical trial, older adults can be screened forhearing loss using simple methods, and effective treatments exist and areavailable for many forms of hearing loss.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.289.15.1976

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 55 references

Cited by

See all 450

Metadata

Authors
Yueh, B., Shapiro, N., MacLean, C. H., & Shekelle, P. G.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2003-04-16
Volume
289
Issue
15
Pages
1976
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2002843795
Cited by
450
References
55
FWCI
5.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Screening and Management of Adult Hearing Loss in Primary Care: Scientific Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.289.15.1976
The paper
Yueh, B., Shapiro, N., MacLean, C. H., & Shekelle, P. G. (2003). Screening and Management of Adult Hearing Loss in Primary Care: Scientific Review. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.15.1976

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.