Identifying a context-effective school hearing screening test: An emic/etic framework

References

• American National Standards Institute. 1991. Maximum permissible ambient noise levels for audiometric test rooms (ANSI S3.1-1991). New York: Acoustical Society of America.
   Google Scholar
• AuDX User's and Service Manual: Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions Measurement System. 2005. Mundelein, Illinois: Bio-Logic Systems Corp.
   Google Scholar
• Beppu R., Hattori T. & Yanagita N. 1997. Comparison of TEOAE with play audiometry for screening hearing problems in children. Auris Nasus Larynx, 24, 367–371.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berg A.L., Papri H., Ferdous S., Khan N.Z. & Durkin M.S. 2006. Screening methods for childhood hearing impairment in rural Bangladesh. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 70, 107–114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bu X., Li X. & Driscoll C. 2005. The Chinese hearing questionnaire for school children. JAMA, 1, 687–697.
   Google Scholar
• Cloete T. 2014. Identifying a Contextually-relevant School Hearing Screening Protocol: A Collaborative Approach to Protocol Planning. Saarbrüken: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health and Department of Basic Education. 2012. Integrated School Health Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Driscoll C., Kei J., & McPherson B. 2001. Outcomes of transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions testing in six-year-old school children: A comparison with pure-tone screening and tympanometry. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 57, 67–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasziou P., Irwig L., Bain C. & Colditz G. 2001. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harris M. 1976. History and significance of the emic/etic distinction. Ann Rev Anthropol, 5, 329–350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanjee A. 1999. Assessment research. Terre Blanche & Durrheim (eds.) Research in Practice: Applied Methods for the Social Sciences. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press. pp. 287–308.
   Google Scholar
• Kathard H. & Pillay M. 2013. Promoting change through political consciousness: A South African speech-language pathology response to the World Report on Disability. International Journal of Speech- Language Pathology, 15 (1), 84–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krueger W.W.O. & Ferguson L. 2002. A comparison of screening methods in school-aged children. Otolaryngol Head and Neck Surg, 127 (6), 516–519.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis F. n.d., Education Planning, Western Cape Education Department, pp. 85–109.
   Google Scholar
• Mackinnon A. 2000. A spreadsheet for the calculation of comprehensive statistics for the assessment of diagnostic tests and inter-rater agreement. Comput Biol Med, 30 (3), 127–134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marshall M.N. 1996. Sampling for qualitative research. Fam Pract, 13, 522–525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin F.N. & Clark J.G. 1996. Hearing Care for Children. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• McPherson B., Kei J., Smyth V., Latham S. & Loscher J. 1998. Feasability of community-based hearing screening using transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions. Public Health, 112, 147–152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McPherson B. & Olusanya B.O. 2008, Screening for hearing loss in developing countries. In: B. McPherson & R. Brouillette (EDS.) Audiology in Developing Countries. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. pp. 75–106.
   Google Scholar
• Moher D., Barrowman N., Daniel R., Eccles M., Grimshaw J. et al. 2007. When and how to update systematic reviews (Protocol). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 2. Art. No: MR000023. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000023.pub2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mosley H. & Mayer A. 1999. Benchmarking National Labour Market Performance: A Radar Chart Approach. Discussion paper FS|99-202. Report prepared for European Commission, Directorate-General V, Employment, Industrial Relations and Social Affairs (DG V/A2).
   Google Scholar
• Olusanya B.O., Wirz S.L. & Luxon L.M. 2008. Community-based infant hearing screening for early detection of permanent hearing loss in Lagos, Nigeria: A cross-sectional study. Bull World Health Organ, 86, 956–963.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton M.Q. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). California: Sage Publications, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Pope C., Ziebland S. & Mays N. 2000. Qualitative methods in health research: Analysing qualitative data. British Medical Journal, 320, 114–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prescott C.A.J., Omoding S.S., Fermor J. & Ogilvy D. 1999. An evaluation of the ‘voice test’ as a method for assessing hearing in children with particular reference to the situation in developing countries. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 51, 165–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prӧschel U. & Eysholdt U. 1995. Specificity and sensitivity of transient click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE). Laryngorhinootologie, 74 (8), 481–488.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson M.P., Williamson T.J., Reid A., Tarlow M.J. & Rudd P.T. 1998. Otoacoustic emissions as a screening test for hearing impairment in children recovering from acute bacterial meningitis. Pediatrics, 102 (6), 1364–1368.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riegelman R.K. 2005. Studying a Study and Testing a Test: How to Read the Medical Evidence (5th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
   Google Scholar
• Sabo M.P., Winston R. & Macais J.D. 2000. Comparison of pure-tone and transient otoacoustic emissions screening in a grade school population. Am J Otolaryngol, 21 (1), 88–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saleem Y., Ramachandran S., Ramamurthy L. & Kay N.J. 2007. Role of otoacoustic emissions in children with middle-ear effusion and grommets. J Laryngol Otol, 121 (10), 943–946.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders D. & Chopra M. 2006. Key challenges to achieving health for all in an inequitable society: The case of South Africa. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 73–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sim J. & Wright C.C. 2005. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: Use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther, 85 (3), 257–268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Statistics South Africa. 2012. Census 2011 Statistical release – P0301.4 / Statistics South Africa, Pretoria.
   Google Scholar
• Swanepoel D., Louw B. & Hugo R. 2007. A novel service delivery model for infant hearing screening in developing countries. Int J Audiol, 46, 321–327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teddlie C. & Tashakkori A. 2009. Foundations in Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. California: Sage Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Western Cape Education Department. 2013. Annual Report 2012/2013.
   Google Scholar
• Whiting P., Rutjes A.W.S., Reitsma J.B., Glas A.S., Bossuyt P.M.M. et al. 2004. Sources of variation and bias in studies of diagnostic accuracy: A systematic review. Ann Intern Med, 140 (3), 189–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization/World Bank. 2011. World Report on Disability, viewed 13 November 2014, http://www.who.int/disabilities/worldreport/2011/report.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Yin L., Bottrell C., Clarke N., Shacks J. & Poulsen M.K. 2009. Otoacoustic emissions: A valid, efficient first-line hearing screen for preschool children. J Sch Health, 79 (4). 147–152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar