ArticleSeminars in hearing2023
Scoping Review for a Global Hearing Care Framework: Matching Theory with Practice.
Article in Seminars in hearing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are Hearing Aid Benefit and Satisfaction Rates Higher for Traditional or Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids?Seminars in hearing · 2025Review
- Longitudinal Insights from Blended Hearing Care: Service Modality Choices, Support Received, and Satisfaction Ratings.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Modern Hearing Care Landscape: Toward the Provision of Personalized, Dynamic, and Adaptive Care.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Centering on People: How Hearing Care Professionals Can Adapt to Consumers' Need and Outcomes.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Effect of Determinants of Health on the Hearing Care Framework: An Economic Perspective.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Remote Technologies to Enhance Service Delivery for Adults: Clinical Research Perspectives.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The hearing healthcare industry is evolving rapidly. A framework addressing provision options in contemporary hearing care could assist clinician and client navigate their options to find the most appropriate solution for each individual. A PRISMA approach was used followed by mapping, validation, and thematic analysis to produce a framework to better describe and discuss service and product delivery options in contemporary hearing care. No frameworks were identified to advise matching needs with current provision options in audiological care. Charting, mapping, and thematic analysis of the validation criteria and hearing care literature produced three core domains: Service, Channel, and Technology/Device. The framework developed in this review allows for an understanding of where innovation is occurring in hearing healthcare and differentiates between changes to technology, channel, and service. New questions open up such as whether one model is more effective than another or which model of hearing help is best for which type of person. This framework allows for the disambiguation of hearing health services, hearing loss technology, and the channel in which services and technology are delivered. It has potential to be a versatile and valuable addition to the industry of hearing healthcare.
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.