ArticlePloS one2024
Exploring awareness of hearing loss and ear health in Jordanian adults.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dementia in the Middle East and North Africa: an integrative narrative review of epidemiology, risk structure, and health system implications.Journal of global health · 2026Review
- Knowledge and Perceptions of Pediatric Hearing Loss among University Students in Jordan.International archives of otorhinolaryngology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the awareness about hearing loss and ear health among adults in Jordan.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted where a questionnaire was filled from the month of November to the month of December of the year 2023, to assess the level of awareness about hearing loss and ear health. The participants included were Jordanian adults (age ≥ 18 years) residing in the North, Middle and South of Jordan.
resultsData from 333 participants (54.1% men) were analyzed. Participants between 18 and 28 years of age comprised 29.7% of the sample population. More than half of the participants (52.6%) held a university degree. Overall percentage of correct responses was 83%. Women, postgraduate degree holders, and participants diagnosed with hearing loss had an average of 11.96±1.47, 12.65±1.59 and 11.70±1.69 correct answers, respectively. The highest correct response received (97.6%) was for: hearing aids need to fit accurately to provide the maximum benefit. Furthermore, 97% of the sample correctly acknowledged that sudden hearing loss is an emergency and requires an immediate audiological assessment. The main misconception was that a deaf-mute cannot speak because of defects in the vocal tract, with only 39.3% of the sample providing a correct response. The other two misconceptions were: cotton buds are necessary for ear cleaning and are the safest means, and that ear drops are sufficient to treat earache, with 78.1% correct responses for each statement. Participants with higher level of education had higher odds of answering the questions correctly, with limited role observed for gender, prior diagnosis of hearing loss and a family history of hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Majority of the adults surveyed provided a correct answer to the hearing loss and ear health survey. While most of the sample population were aware that a sudden loss of hearing is considered an emergency, only one third knew that defects in vocal cords do not play a role in deafness/muteness. The study highlights the need of public education on causes of hearing loss and measures needed to prevent the onset of hearing loss, with emphasis on methods for caring of ear health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.