Introduction: The study aims to determine the correlation of the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Elderly Screening (HHIE-S) questionnaire with the pure tone audiometry (PTA) in the Malaysian older adult population. Methods: This cross-sectional study took a random sample of adults ≥60 years in a tertiary hospital. A total of 202 participants completed both the HHIE-S questionnaire and the PTA test. The total HHIE-S score and the PTA result were explored for the correlation using a Kruskal–Wallis and the validity using the receiver operating characteristic curve. Results: A Kruskal–Wallis analysis indicated a significant correlation for the level of hearing impairment (r =.704, p < 0.001) between the HHIE-S score and the PTA result. Comparison between HHIE-S score of 8 and the PTA >25db results gave sensitivity: 87.9%, specificity: 78.4%, positive predictive value: 80.3%, and negative predictive value: 86.6%. Conclusion: This study suggests that the HHIE-S questionnaire is a good and valid screening instrument for hearing impairment detection in the Malaysian older adult population.

The application of artificial intelligence (AI) is on the rise in the healthcare industry. However, the study on the physicians’ perspectives is still lacking. The study aimed to examine physicians’ attitudes, expectations, and concerns regarding the application of AI in medicine. A cross-sectional study was conducted in October 2019 among physicians in a tertiary teaching hospital in Malaysia. The survey used a validated questionnaire from the literature, which covered: (1) socio-demographic profile; (2) attitude towards the application of AI; (3) expected application in medicine; and (4) possible risks of using AI. Comparison of the mean score between the groups using a t-test or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). A total of 112 physicians participated in the study: 64.3% from the clinical departments; 35.7% from the non-clinical specialties. The physicians from non-clinical departments had significantly higher mean attitude score (mean = 14.94 ± 3.12) compared to the clinical (person-oriented) departments (mean = 14.13 ± 3.10) and clinical (technique-oriented) departments (mean = 13.06 ± 2.88) (p = 0.033). The tech-savvy participants had a significantly higher mean attitude score (mean = 14.72 ± 3.55) than the non–tech-savvy participants (mean = 13.21 ± 2.46) (p = 0.01). There are differences in the expectations among the respondents and some concerns exist especially on the legal aspect of AI application in medicine. Proper training and orientation should precede its implementation and must be appropriate to the physicians’ needs for its utilization and sustainability.