Dutch consensus on diagnosis and treatment of hearing impairment in children and adults with intellectual disability. The Consensus Committee.

A Dutch panel of doctors and audiologists wrote a guide.

They picked the best ways to find hearing loss in kids and adults with intellectual disability.

They chose cheap tools like Oto-Acoustic Emissions and set clear rules for next steps.

The guide does not give new numbers.

It tells you what to do: screen early, use quick objective tests, and send people on when results look off.

Fujiura (2012) adds a twist. The 1996 guide trusts machines, but T shows you can also ask clients with ID about pain or ringing if you use short, concrete questions.

Oliver et al. (2002) and English et al. (1995) checked another Dutch screen, the Reiss Screen. Like the hearing guide, they found the tool works best when you watch rater differences and do not lean on weak sub-scores.

Lifshitz et al. (2016) looked at working memory tests. They remind us that task type matters: visuospatial tasks hold up better in ID than ear-based phonological tasks, so even after a clean OAE pass, listening tasks may still be hard.

You now have a low-cost plan. Start every new client with a quick OAE pass-or-fail test. If they fail, follow the Dutch referral map. If they pass but still struggle, add adapted self-report questions from Fujiura (2012) and watch for visuospatial supports during instruction. This two-step catch keeps you from missing both ear problems and listening problems that tests can skip.