Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36571777›Full record

ArticleAge and ageing2022

Dementia and hearing-aid use: a two-way street.

Graham Naylor, Lauren Dillard, Martin Orrell, Blossom C M Stephan, Oliver Zobay, Gabrielle H Saunders

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Age and ageing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Enablers and Barriers to Hearing aid Use in People Living With Dementia.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Interactive effects of hearing aid use and cognitive function in patients with hearing loss.Psychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Graham NaylorSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1544-1944
Lauren DillardDepartment of Otolaryngology- Head & Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Martin OrrellSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Blossom C M StephanSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Oliver ZobaySchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Gabrielle H SaundersVA Rehabilitation R&D, National Center for Rehabilitative Auditory Research, Portland, OR, USA.

Funding

Chief Scientist OfficeDepartment of HealthMedical Research Council MC_UU_00010/4Medical Research Council MR/S003576/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesHearing-aid use may reduce risk of dementia, but cognitive impairment makes use more challenging. An observed association between reduced hearing-aid use and incident dementia could reflect either or both of these causal paths. The objective was to examine the effects of each path while minimising contamination between paths.

methodsHealth records data from 380,794 Veterans who obtained hearing aids from the US Veterans Affairs healthcare system were analysed. Analysis 1 (n = 72,180) used multivariable logistic regression to model the likelihood of incident dementia 3.5-5 years post hearing-aid fitting for patients free of dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Analysis 2 (n = 272,748) modelled the likelihood of being a persistent hearing-aid user at 3 years 2 months after fitting, contrasting subgroups by level of cognitive function at the time of fitting. Analysis time windows were optimized relative to dataset constraints. Models were controlled for available relevant predictors.

resultsThe adjusted OR for incident dementia was 0.73 (95% CI 0.66-0.81) for persistent (versus non-persistent) hearing-aid users. The adjusted OR for hearing-aid use persistence was 0.46 (95% CI 0.43-0.48) in those with pre-existing dementia (versus those remaining free of MCI and dementia).

conclusionSubstantial independent associations are observed in both directions, suggesting that hearing-aid use decreases risk of dementia and that better cognitive function predisposes towards persistent use. Research studying protective effects of hearing-aid use against dementia needs to account for cognitive status. Clinically, hearing devices and hearing care processes must be accessible and usable for all, regardless of their cognitive status.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionDementiaHearing AidsHearing LossHearingHumanscausalitydementiahearing aidolder peoplepersistence

Identifiers

PMID36571777
PMCPMC9792081

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.