ArticleSmart health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2022
Personalizing over-the-counter hearing aids using pairwise comparisons.
Article in Smart health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2022. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Potential Roles of Audiologists Supporting Patients' OTC Hearing Aid Journey.Seminars in hearing · 2025Review
- A Review of Machine Learning Approaches for the Personalization of Amplification in Hearing Aids.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Customer Archetypes in Hearing Health Care.American journal of audiology · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Over-the-counter hearing aids enable more affordable and accessible hearing health care by shifting the burden of configuring the device from trained audiologists to end-users. A critical challenge is to provide users with an easy-to-use method for personalizing the many parameters which control sound amplification based on their preferences. This paper presents a novel approach to fitting hearing aids that provides a higher degree of personalization than existing methods by using user feedback more efficiently. Our approach divides the fitting problem into two parts. First, we discretize an initial 24-dimensional space of possible configurations into a small number of presets. Presets are constructed to ensure that they can meet the hearing needs of a large fraction of Americans with mild-to-moderate hearing loss. Then, an online agent learns the best preset by asking a sequence of pairwise comparisons. This learning problem is an instance of the multi-armed bandit problem. We performed a 35-user study to understand the factors that affect user preferences and evaluate the efficacy of multi-armed bandit algorithms. Most notably, we identified a new relationship between a user's preference and presets: a user's preference can be represented as one or more preference points in the initial configuration space with stronger preferences expressed for nearby presets (as measured by the Euclidean distance). Based on this observation, we have developed a Two-Phase Personalizing algorithm that significantly reduces the number of comparisons required to identify a user's preferred preset. Simulation results indicate that the proposed algorithm can find the best configuration with a median of 25 comparisons, reducing by half the comparisons required by the best baseline. These results indicate that it is feasible to configure over-the-counter hearing aids using a small number of pairwise comparisons without the help of professionals.
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.