Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30068614›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2018

Randomised controlled feasibility trial of the Active Communication Education programme plus hearing aid provision versus hearing aid provision alone (ACE to HEAR): a study protocol.

Nicholas J Thyer, Jude Watson, Cath Jackson, Louise Hickson, Christina Maynard, Anne Forster, Laura Clark, Kerry Bell, Caroline Fairhurst, Kim Cocks and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicholas J ThyerLeeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine (LICAMM), University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0025-783X
Jude WatsonYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Cath JacksonValid Research Ltd, Wetherby, UK.
Louise HicksonSchool of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Christina MaynardLeeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine (LICAMM), University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Anne ForsterLeeds Institute of Health Sciences (LIHS), University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Laura ClarkYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Kerry BellYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Caroline FairhurstYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Kim CocksYork Trials Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Rob GardnerAudiology Department, Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford, UK.
Kate IleyAudiology Department, York Hospital, York, UK.
Lorraine GaileyHearing Link, Eastbourne, UK.
University of York · GBUniversity of Leeds · GBBradford Royal Infirmary · GBThe University of Queensland · AUValid International (United Kingdom) · GBYork Hospital · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0215-36147
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUp to 30% of hearing aids fitted to new adult clients are reported to be of low benefit and used intermittently or not at all. Evidence suggests that additional interventions paired with service-delivery redesign may help improve hearing aid use and benefit. The range of interventions available is limited. In particular, the efficacy of interventions like the Active Communication Education (ACE) programme that focus on improving communication success with hearing-impaired people and significant others, has not previously been assessed. We propose that improved communication outcomes associated with the ACE intervention, lead to an increased perception of hearing aid value and more realistic expectations associated with hearing aid use and ownership, which are reported to be key barriers and facilitators for successful hearing aid use. This study will assess the feasibility of delivering ACE and undertaking a definitive randomised controlled trial to evaluate whether ACE would be a cost-effective and acceptable way of increasing quality of life through improving communication and hearing aid use in a public health service such as the National Health Service. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a randomised controlled, open feasibility trial with embedded economic and process evaluations delivered in audiology departments in two UK cities. We aim to recruit 84 patients (and up to 84 significant others) aged 18 years and over, who report moderate or less than moderate benefit from their new hearing aid. The feasibility of a large-scale study and the acceptability of the ACE intervention will be measured by recruitment rates, treatment retention, follow-up rates and qualitative interviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval granted by South East Coast-Surrey Research Ethics Committee (16/LO/2012). Dissemination of results will be via peer-reviewed research publications both online and in print, conference presentations, posters, patient forums and Trust bulletins. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN28090877.

Indexed as

AdultCitiesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHealth Services ResearchHearing AidsHearing LossHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPersons with DisabilitiesProgram EvaluationQuality of LifeUnited Kingdomactive communication educationcommunication benefiteconomic benefithearing aid benefithearing aid usehearing loss

Identifiers

PMID30068614
PMCPMC6074637
OpenAlexW2885350553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.