Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37200042›Full record

ArticleJAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery2023

Potential Clinical and Economic Outcomes of Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids in the US.

Ethan D Borre, Mohini Johri, Judy R Dubno, Evan R Myers, Susan D Emmett, Juliessa M Pavon, Howard W Francis, Osondu Ogbuoji, Gillian D Sanders Schmidler

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery, 2023. 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
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The impact of hearing loss on annual incident age-associated dementia cases and quality of life in the United States.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ethan D BorreDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Mohini JohriDuke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Judy R DubnoDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston.
Evan R MyersDuke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Susan D EmmettDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock.
Juliessa M PavonDepartment of Medicine, Division of Geriatrics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Howard W FrancisDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery and Communication Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Osondu OgbuojiDuke-Margolis Center for Health Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Gillian D Sanders SchmidlerDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Duke University · USDuke Institute for Health Innovation · USMedical University of South Carolina · USUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences · US

Funding

Support for QA/QC for Prior Approval ProcessUL1TR002553 · NCATS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LI, JENNIFER S, MCNAMARA, JAMES O. · 2018 to 2023
$58.5M
Economic Evaluation and Research Prioritization of Adult Hearing Screening in the USF30DC019846 · NIDCD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI BORRE, ETHAN D · 2021 to 2022
$88k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002553NIDCD NIH HHS F30 DC019846
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids are now available in the US; however, their clinical and economic outcomes are unknown. Objective: To project the clinical and economic outcomes of traditional hearing aid provision compared with OTC hearing aid provision. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cost-effectiveness analysis used a previously validated decision model of hearing loss (HL) to simulate US adults aged 40 years and older across their lifetime in US primary care offices who experienced yearly probabilities of acquiring HL (0.1%-10.4%), worsening of their HL, and traditional hearing aid uptake (0.5%-8.1%/y at a fixed uptake cost of $3690) and utility benefits (0.11 additional utils/y). For OTC hearing aid provision, persons with perceived mild to moderate HL experienced increased OTC hearing aid uptake (1%-16%/y) based on estimates of time to first HL diagnosis. In the base case, OTC hearing aid utility benefits ranged from 0.05 to 0.11 additional utils/y (45%-100% of traditional hearing aids), and costs were $200 to $1400 (5%-38% of traditional hearing aids). Distributions were assigned to parameters to conduct probabilistic uncertainty analysis. Intervention: Provision of OTC hearing aids, at increased uptake rates, across a range of effectiveness and costs. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lifetime undiscounted and discounted (3%/y) costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results: Traditional hearing aid provision resulted in 18.162 QALYs, compared with 18.162 to 18.186 for OTC hearing aids varying with OTC hearing aid utility benefit (45%-100% that of traditional hearing aids). Provision of OTC hearing aids was associated with greater lifetime discounted costs by $70 to $200 along with OTC device cost ($200-$1000/pair; 5%-38% traditional hearing aid cost) due to increased hearing aid uptake. Provision of OTC hearing aids was considered cost-effective (ICER<$100 000/QALY) if the OTC utility benefit was 0.06 or greater (55% of the traditional hearing aid effectiveness). In probabilistic uncertainty analysis, OTC hearing aid provision was cost-effective in 53% of simulations. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cost-effectiveness analysis, provision of OTC hearing aids was associated with greater uptake of hearing intervention and was cost-effective over a range of prices so long as OTC hearing aids were greater than 55% as beneficial to patient quality of life as traditional hearing aids.

Indexed as

DeafnessHearing AidsHearing LossAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID37200042
PMCPMC10196927
OpenAlexW4377010933

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.