A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Costs of different strategies for neonatal hearing screening: a modelling approach. | LitMetric

Costs of different strategies for neonatal hearing screening: a modelling approach.

Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed

TNO Prevention and Health, Division of Public Health, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Published: November 2001

Objective: To compare the cost effectiveness of various strategies for neonatal hearing screening by estimating the cost per hearing impaired child detected.

Design: Cost analyses with a simulation model, including a multivariate sensitivity analysis. Comparisons of the cost per child detected were made for: screening method (automated auditory brainstem response or otoacoustic emissions); number of stages in the screening process (two or three); target disorder (bilateral hearing loss or both unilateral and bilateral loss); location (at home or at a child health clinic).

Setting: The Netherlands

Target Population: All newborn infants not admitted to neonatal intensive care units.

Main Outcome Measure: Costs per child detected with a hearing loss of 40 dB or more in the better ear.

Results: Costs of a three stage screening process in child health clinics are 39.0 pounds (95% confidence interval 20.0 to 57.0) per child detected with automated auditory brainstem response compared with 25.0 (14.4 to 35.6) pounds per child detected with otoacoustic emissions. A three stage screening process not only reduces the referral rates, but is also likely to cost less than a two stage process because of the lower cost of diagnostic facilities. The extra cost (over and above a screening programme detecting bilateral losses) of detecting one child with unilateral hearing loss is 1500-4000 pounds. With the currently available information, no preference can be expressed for a screening location.

Conclusions: Three stage screening with otoacoustic emissions is recommended. Whether screening at home is more cost effective than screening at a child health clinic needs further study.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1721325PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/fn.85.3.f177DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

child detected
16
otoacoustic emissions
12
screening process
12
hearing loss
12
child health
12
three stage
12
stage screening
12
screening
11
child
9
strategies neonatal
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!