4.5 Article

Risk factors for permanent childhood hearing impairment

Journal

ARCHIVES OF DISEASE IN CHILDHOOD
Volume 105, Issue 2, Pages 187-189

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2018-315866

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Economic and Social Research Council studentship [ES/J500185/1]
  2. Health Data Research UK - UK Medical Research Council
  3. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
  4. Economic and Social Research Council
  5. National Institute for Health Research (England)
  6. Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates
  7. Health and Social Care Research and Development Division (Welsh Government)
  8. Public Health Agency (Northern Ireland)
  9. British Heart Foundation
  10. Wellcome Trust

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective While several perinatal risk factors for permanent childhood hearing impairment (PCHI) are known, association with gestational length remains unclear. We hypothesised that shorter gestational length predicts higher PCHI risk. Design 19 504 participants from the UK Millennium Cohort Study (born 2000-2002, prior to newborn screening). Methods Multivariable discrete-time survival analysis to examine associations between parent-reported PCHI by age 11 years and gestational length, plus other prespecified factors. Results PCHI affected 2.1 per 1000 children (95% CI 1.5 to 3.0) by age 11; however, gestational length did not predict PCHI risk (HR, 95% CI 1.00, 0.98 to 1.03 per day increase). Risk was increased in those with neonatal illness, with or without admission to neonatal care (6.33, 2.27 to 17.63 and 2.62, 1.15 to 5.97, respectively), of Bangladeshi or Pakistani ethnicity (2.78, 1.06 to 7.31) or born to younger mothers (0.92, 0.87 to 0.97 per year). Conclusion Neonatal illness, rather than gestational length, predicts PCHI risk. Further research should explore associations with ethnicity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available