Table 1 Quality evaluation criteria. Four essential criteria were required for inclusion, indicating the study was internally valid. Studies meeting these four criteria were further evaluated on the sample, screening and outcome

 ✓

The sampling method and exclusion criteria did not introduce sampling bias.

 ✓

The design or analysis allowed for comparability between parameter and minimized co-intervention bias.

 ✓

The outcomes were reliable (e.g., all infants screened were accounted for; there was no error in the result tallies).

 ✓

The outcomes were valid (e.g., based on objective measures; did not contain bias).

 *

The community was described from which all infants were drawn.

 -

The community was not described from which infants were drawn.

 *

The sample size was 1000 or more for each group described.

 -

The sample size was less than 1000 for each group described.

 *

The coverage rate was described and was 95% or more, as recommended by the Joint Committee of Infant Hearing.

 -

The coverage rate was not described, or if described, coverage was less than 95%.

 *

The infants included were described with respect to risk factors, NICU admission, well babies, all babies born, etc.

 -

The infants included were not described.

 *

The screening protocol was described and included at least four of the five following factors: infant age at screening, test method, number of screens performed in screening step 1, the test device, and referral criteria (If not automatic) including one or both ears.

 -

Less than four of the five above-mentioned factors pertaining to the screening protocol were described.

 *

The method for collecting data was described (e.g., paper records, centralized database, etc).

 -

The method for collecting data was not described.

 *

The criteria for determining loss to follow-up (or nonattendance) was described^a.

 -

The criteria for determining loss to follow-up (or nonattendance) was not described^a.