1. World Health Organization. Addressing the rising prevalence of hearing loss. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/260336/9789241550260-eng.pdf (2018). (last accessed 15 September 2020)
Google Scholar2. World Health Organization. Global costs of unaddressed hearing loss and cost-effectiveness of interventions: a WHO report. 2017. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/254659/9789241512046-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Google Scholar3. Meehan, SA, Sloot, R, Draper, HR, et al. Factors associated with linkage to HIV care and TB treatment at community-based HIV testing services in Cape Town, South Africa. PLoS One 2018; 13: e0195208.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline4. Forge, A, Schacht, J. Aminoglycoside antibiotics. Audiol Neurotol 2000; 5: 3–22.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI5. Cunningham, LL, Tucci, DL. Hearing loss in adults. N Engl J Med 2017; 377: 2465–2473, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6457651/pdf/nihms-1017320.pdf
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline6. Gelfand, S . Essentials of audiology. 4th ed. New York: Thieme, 2016.
Google Scholar | Crossref7. Wium, A, Gerber, B. Ototoxicity management: an investigation into doctors’ knowledge and practices, and the roles of audiologists in a tertiary hospital. S Afr J Commun Disord 2016; 63: 1–15.
Google Scholar8. World Health Organization. Companion handbook to the WHO guidelines for the problematic management of drug-resistant tuberculosis, 2014.
Google Scholar9. Professional Board for Speech, Language and Hearing Professions. Audiological management of patients on treatment that includes ototoxic medications, https://www.hpcsa.co.za/Uploads/SLH/Guidelines for Audiological Management of Patients on Treatment that includes Ototoxic Medications.pdf (2018).
Google Scholar10. Durrant, J, Campbell, K, Fausti, S, et al. American Academy of Audiology position statement and clinical practice guidelines: ototoxicity monitoring. Wahington: American Academy of Audiology, 2009.
Google Scholar11. Paken, J, Govender, CD, Pillay, M, et al. Cisplatin-associated ototoxicity: a review for the health professional. J Toxicol 2016; 2016: 4. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1809394
Google Scholar | Crossref12. American Speech-Language-Hearing-Association . Audiologic management of individuals receiving cochleotoxic drug therapy, https://www2.asha.org/policy/GL1994-00003/ (1994)
Google Scholar13. Harris, T, Peer, S, Fagan, J. Audiological monitoring for ototoxic tuberculosis, human immunodeficiency virus and cancer therapies in a developing world setting. J Laryngol Otol 2012; 126: 548–551.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline14. Beukes, EW, Manchaiah, V. Internet-based audiological interventions: an update for clinicians. Perspect ASHA Spec Interest Groups 2019; 4: 542–552.
Google Scholar | Crossref15. Pillay, M, Tiwari, R, Kathard, H, et al. Sustainable workforce: South African audiologists and speech therapists. Hum Resour Health 2020; 18: 1–13.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline16. Swanepoel, DW, Clark, JL, Koekemoer, D, et al. Telehealth in audiology: the need and potential to reach underserved communities. Int J Audiol 2010; 49: 195–202.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI17. Kim, J, Jeon, S, Kim, D, et al. A review of contemporary teleaudiology: literature review, technology, and considerations for practicing. J Audiol Otol 2021; 25: 1–7.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline18. Muñoz, K, Nagaraj, NK, Nichols, N. Applied tele-audiology research in clinical practice during the past decade: a scoping review. Int J Audiol 2021; 60: S4–S12.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline19. Bennett, RJ, Swanepoel, DW, Manchaiah, VINAYA, et al. Tele-audiology services in Australia: a shift in clinical practices. AudiologyNOW 2020; 81: 11–13.
Google Scholar20. Scott, RE, Mars, M. Telehealth in the developing world: current status and future prospects. Smart Homecare Technol Telehealth 2015; 3: 25–37.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI21. Swanepoel, DW, Hall, JW. A systematic review of telehealth applications in audiology. Telemed e-Health 2010; 16: 181–200.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI22. Stevens, G, Flaxman, S, Brunskill, E, et al. Global and regional hearing impairment prevalence: an analysis of 42 studies in 29 countries. Eur J Public Health 2013; 23: 146–152.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI23. Govender, S, Mars, M. The use of telehealth services to facilitate audiological management for children: a scoping review and content analysis. J Telemed Telecare 2017; 23: 392–401.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI24. Swanepoel, DW . Ehealth technologies enable more accessible hearing care. Semin Hear 2020; 41: 133–140.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline25. Arksey, H, O’Malley, L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005; 8: 19–32.
Google Scholar | Crossref26. Daudt, HM, van Mossel, C, Scott, SJ. Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013; 13: 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-48
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline27. Peters, M, Godfrey, C, McInerney, P, et al. Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. 1–24. (2015).
Google Scholar28. Alhojailan, MI . Thematic analysis: a critical review of its process and evaluation. WEJSS 2012; 1: 39–47.
Google Scholar29. Braun, V, Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006; 3: 77–101.
Google Scholar | Crossref30. Taherdoost, H . Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research. Int. J. Acad. Res 2016; 5(3): 33–34.
Google Scholar31. Berg-Schlosser, D, De Meur, G. Comparative research design: case and variable selection. In: Rihoux B and Ragin CC. (eds) Configurational comparative methods: qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques, Vol. 51. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2009, 19–32. doi:10.4135/9781452226569
Google Scholar | Crossref32. Papanicolas, I, Woskie, LR, Jha, AK. Health care spending in the United States and other high-income countries. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 2018; 319: 1024–1039.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline33. Bradshaw, D, Nannan, NN, Pillay-van Wyk, V, et al. Burden of disease in South Africa: protracted transitions driven by social pathologies. South African Medical Journal 2019 Dec 5; 109(11b): 69–76.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline34. Lustig, N . Inequality and fiscal redistribution in middle income countries: Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Indonesia, Mexico, Peru and South Africa. J Glob Dev 2016; 7: 17–60.
Google Scholar35. Meinke, DK, Norris, JA, Flynn, BP, et al. Going wireless and booth-less for hearing testing in industry. Int J Audiol 2017; 56: 41–51.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline36. Rudolph-Claasen, Z . Hearing loss amongst DR-TB patients that received extended high frequency pure tone audiometry monitoring (KUDUwave) at three DR-TB decentralized sites in Kwazulu-Natal. Master in Public Health, University of the Western Cape, 2017.
Google Scholar37. Dille, MF, McMillan, GP, Helt, WJ, et al. A store-and-forward tele-audiology solution to promote efficient screenings for ototoxicity during cisplatin cancer treatment. J Am Acad Audiol 2015; 26: 750–760.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline38. Ellingson, RM, Helt, WJ, Helt, PV, et al. (2011) Mobile software Apps support personalized-SRO and serial monitoring with results indicating early detection of hearing loss. In: Paper presented at the 2011 IEEE International Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference.: Hangzhou, China, conference date: 10-12 May 2011. doi: 10.1109/IMTC.2011.5944090
Google Scholar | Crossref39. Jacobs, PG, Silaski, G, Wilmington, D, et al. Development and evaluation of a portable audiometer for high-frequency screening of hearing loss from ototoxicity in homes/clinics. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2012; 59: 3097–3103.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline40. Konrad-Martin, D, Reavis, KM, McMillan, G, et al. Proposed comprehensive ototoxicity monitoring program for VA healthcare (COMP-VA). J Rehabil Res Dev 2014; 51: 81.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline41. Brungart, D, Schurman, J, Konrad-Martin, D, et al. Using tablet-based technology to deliver time-efficient ototoxicity monitoring. Int J Audiol 2018; 57: S78–S86.
Google Scholar | Crossref42. Dille, MF, Jacobs, PG, Gordon, SY, et al. OtoID: new extended frequency, portable audiometer for ototoxicity monitoring. J Rehabil Res Dev 2013; 50: 997–1006.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline43. Peer, S, Fagan, JJ. Hearing loss in the developing world: evaluating the iPhone mobile device as a screening tool. S Afr Med J 2015; 105: 35–39.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline44. Stumpf, A . Comparison of automated hearing testing approaches for out-patients receiving ototoxic chemotherapy. Capstones Sch Proj 2019: 29–79.
Google Scholar45. Rieke, CC, Clavier, OH, Allen, LV, et al. Fixed-level frequency threshold testing for ototoxicity monitoring. Ear Hear 2017; 38: e369–e375.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline46. Kanji, A . Ambient noise levels and hearing screening outcomes: where technology meets clinical decision making. Hearing Balance Commun 2019; 11: 12–17.
Google Scholar | Crossref47. Bornman, ME . Validation of hearTest smartphone application for extended high frequency hearing thresholds. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pretoria, 2017.
Google Scholar48. Bornman, M, Swanepoel, DW, De Jager, LB, et al. Extended high-frequency smartphone audiometry: validity and reliability. J Am Acad Audiol 2019; 30: 217–226, https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/aaa/jaaa/2019/00000030/00000003/art00007%3bjsessionid=19v6hanu7bogf.x-ic-live-01
Google Scholar | Medline49. Brittz, M . Clinical utility of mobile and automated hearing health technology in an infectious disease clinic setting. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pretoria, 2017.
Google Scholar50. Brittz, M, Heinze, B, Mahomed-Asmail, F, et al. Monitoring hearing in an infectious disease clinic with mHealth technologies. J Am Acad Audiol 2019; 30: 482–492.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline51. Hollander, C, Joubert, K, Schellack, N. An ototoxicity grading system within a mobile app (OtoCalc) for a resource-limited setting to guide grading and management of drug-induced hearing loss in patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis: prospective, cross-sectional case series. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2020; 8: e14036.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline52. Al-Abri, R, Al-Balushi, M, Kolethekkat, A, et al. The accuracy of IOS device-based uHear as a screening tool for hearing loss: a preliminary study from the Middle East. Oman Med J 2016; 31: 142–145.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline53. Potgieter, J-M, Swanepoel, DW, Smits, C. Evaluating a smartphone digits-in-noise test as part of the audiometric test battery. S Afr J Commun Disord 2018; 65: 3–5. https://doi.org/:10.4102/sajcd.v65i1.574
Google Scholar | Medline54. Khoza-Shangase, K . Risk versus benefit: who assesses this in the management of patients on ototoxic drugs? J Pharm Bioallied Sci 2017; 9: 171.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline55. King, KA, Brewer, CC. Clinical trials, ototoxicity grading scales and the audiologist’s role in therapeutic decision making. Int J Audiol 2018; 57: S89–S98.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline56. Baguley, DM, Prayuenyong, P. Looking beyond the audiogram in ototoxicity associated with platinum-based chemotherapy. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2020; 85: 245–250.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline