ArticleInternational journal of audiology2021
Predicting hearing aid use in adults: the Beaver Dam Offspring Study.
Article in International journal of audiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Change on the Revised Hearing Handicap Inventory and associated factors: results from a longitudinal cohort study.International journal of audiology · 2025Article
- Associations of Hearing Loss and Hearing Aid Use With Cognition, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Depressive Symptoms.Journal of aging and health · 2023Article
- Factors Affecting Hearing Aid Adoption by Adults With High-Frequency Hearing Loss: The Beaver Dam Offspring Study.American journal of audiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to (i) develop a model that predicts hearing aid (HA) use and (ii) determine if model fit is improved by adding factors not typically collected in audiological evaluations.
designTwo models were created and evaluated. The "clinical" model used factors typically collected during audiologic clinical evaluations. The "expanded" model considered additional clinical, health and lifestyle factors to determine if the model fit could be improved (compared to clinical model). Models were created with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) logistic regression with 10-fold cross validation. Predictive ability was evaluated via receiver operating characteristic curves and concordance statistics (c-statistics). STUDY SAMPLE: This study included 275 participants from the Beaver Dam Offspring Study, a prospective longitudinal cohort study of aging, with a treatable level of hearing loss and no HA use at baseline.
resultsThe clinical and expanded models report predictors important for HA use. The c-statistics of the clinical (0.80) and expanded (0.79) models were not significantly different (
conclusionsSimilar predictive abilities of models suggest audiological evaluations perform well in predicting HA use.
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.