Cited by 146Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsGenomics and Rare DiseasesVestibular and auditory disorders

Massively Parallel Sequencing for Genetic Diagnosis of Hearing Loss: The New Standard of Care

Open access
Shearer, A. Eliot, Smith, Richard J. H.·2015·Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the use of new genetic sequencing techniques for comprehensive genetic testing for hearing loss. Data Sources: Articles were identified from PubMed and Google Scholar databases using pertinent search terms. Review Methods: Literature search identified 30 studies as candidates that met search criteria. Three studies were excluded, and 8 studies were found to be case reports. Twenty studies were included for review analysis, including 7 studies that evaluated controls and 16 studies that evaluated patients with unknown causes of hearing loss; 3 studies evaluated both controls and patients. Conclusions: In the 20 studies included in the review analysis, 426 control samples and 603 patients with unknown causes of hearing loss underwent comprehensive genetic diagnosis for hearing loss using massively parallel sequencing. Control analysis showed a sensitivity and specificity >99%, sufficient for clinical use of these tests. The overall diagnostic rate was 41% (range, 10%‐83%) and varied based on several factors, including inheritance and prescreening prior to comprehensive testing. There were significant differences in platforms available with regard to the number and type of genes included and whether copy number variations were examined. Based on these results, comprehensive genetic testing should form the cornerstone of a tiered approach to clinical evaluation of patients with hearing loss along with history, physical examination, and audiometry and can determine further testing that may be required, if any. Implications for Practice: Comprehensive genetic testing has become the new standard of care for genetic testing for patients with sensorineural hearing loss.

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 · 10.1177/0194599815591156

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • For patients with probable monogenic disease, targeted panels are typically the preferred testing platform.

    “For patients with symptoms that indicate a probable monogenic aeti-ology (such as retinal degeneration, hearing loss or cardiomyopathy), targeted panels are typically the platform of choice133, although they are increasingly performed on a more extensive sequence backbone.”

    From A brief history of human disease genetics (2020) · cites this paper as [133]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shearer, A. E., & Smith, R. J. H.
Affiliations
University of Iowa (US)
Corresponding author
Smith, Richard J. H.
Venue
Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-06-17
Volume
153
Issue
2
Pages
175-182
ISSN
  • 0161-6439 (ISSN-L)
  • 0194-5998
  • 1097-6817
OpenAlex
W1952583930
Cited by
144
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Otolaryngology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (RO1s DC003544, DC002842, DC012049)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vestibular and auditory disorders
Keywords
hearing loss, genetic diagnosis, next-generation sequencing, sensorineural hearing loss, copy number variation, diagnostic yield, mode of inheritance
MeSH terms
Hearing Loss, Sensorineural, Humans, Sensitivity and Specificity, Hearing Loss, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing

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