ArticleAmerican journal of audiology2021
Toward a New Evidence-Based Fitting Paradigm for Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids.
Article in American journal of audiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06499805 (Barriers and Facilitators to OTC Hearing Aids Success), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Barriers and Facilitators to OTC Hearing Aids Success
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hearing Aid Service Models, Technology, and Patient Outcomes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2025Trial
- Effectiveness of a Self-Fitting Tool for User-Driven Fitting of Hearing Aids.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- A novel approach to hearing amplification: audiometric outcomes from Nuance Audio over-the-counter hearing aid glasses.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2026Article
- Facilitators and Barriers to Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Use in People With Dementia: Semistructured Interview Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Scene-Specific Self-Tuning of Hearing Aids Enhances Perceived Speech Quality.American journal of audiology · 2025Article
- Preset Hearing Aid Program Selection in Low-Income Communities: A Longitudinal Study.Audiology research · 2025Article
- Potential Roles of Audiologists Supporting Patients' OTC Hearing Aid Journey.Seminars in hearing · 2025Review
- Changing Knowledge, Principles, and Technology in Contemporary Clinical Audiological Practice: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Remote Technologies to Enhance Service Delivery for Adults: Clinical Research Perspectives.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Evaluating and optimizing hearing-aid self-fitting methods using population coverage.Frontiers in audiology and otology · 2023Article
- Objective Signal Analysis for Investigating Feasibility of Active Noise Cancellation in Hearing Screening.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Self-Adjustment of Hearing Aid Amplification for Lower Speech Levels: Independent Ratings, Paired Comparisons, and Speech Recognition.American journal of audiology · 2022Article
- Common Configurations of Real-Ear Aided Response Targets Prescribed by NAL-NL2 for Older Adults With Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss.American journal of audiology · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose This dual-aim study was intended to develop and validate a new fitting paradigm for over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids. Aim 1 was undertaken to create a limited set of evidence-based preconfigured gain-frequency responses ("presets") for use in OTC devices. Aim 2 tested the efficacy of the presets relative to best-practice verification and determined the best method(s) for older adults to self-select amplification from the set. Method In Aim 1, audiometry data from 267 older adults with mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss were obtained from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey database. Using these data and the National Acoustic Laboratories-Non-Linear 2 (NAL-NL2) prescriptive formula, a set of four presets were created that can fit a large percentage of older Americans with presbycusis. In Aim 2, 37 older adults with hearing loss used five methods to select presets. The selection methods were select-by-audiogram, select-by-self-test, select-by-trying, select-by-questionnaire, and random assignment. Using a crossover design, each participant completed speech recognition testing and sound quality ratings in quiet and noise for all selection methods and a verified NAL-NL2 condition. Results The set of presets can fit 67.9% of older Americans with mild-to-moderate hearing loss (Aim 1). Controlling for hearing thresholds and sound quality ratings, liner mixed-effects models indicated that speech recognition scores for select-by-audiogram, select-by-self-test, and select-by-trying were not statistically different from the NAL-NL2 condition. Statistical analysis indicated that select-by-self-test produced outcomes most consistent with individual outcomes for the NAL-NL2 condition (Aim 2). Conclusion This newly developed fitting paradigm may provide efficacy comparable to best-practice verification and could be used in OTC hearing aids.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.