ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2024
Over-the-Counter Hearing Aids Challenge the Core Values of Traditional Audiology.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Facilitators and Barriers to Over-the-Counter Hearing Aid Use in People With Dementia: Semistructured Interview Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Over-the-counter hearing aids and integrated health-monitoring sensors: a review of clinical evidence and implementation.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Global patterns and demographic drivers of hearing loss attributable to otitis media, 1990-2023.PloS one · 2026Article
- Alignment of Audiologists' Values With Best-Practice Standards: Insights From a National Survey.American journal of audiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeRegulatory changes in the United States introduced over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids with the goal of increasing the accessibility and affordability of hearing health care. It is critical to understand the values inherent to hearing health care systems to evaluate their effectiveness in serving people with hearing difficulty. In this study, we evaluated the relative importance of values across service delivery models and the extent to which the introduction of OTC hearing aids represents a values shift relative to traditional audiology.
methodWe performed a qualitative content analysis of two document categories: critique documents that motivated the creation of OTC hearing aids and regulatory documents that defined OTC hearing aids. Team members coded portions of text for the values they expressed. In total, 29,235 words were coded across 72 pages in four documents. Rank-order analyses were performed to determine the prioritization of values within each category of documents and subsequently compare values between OTC and traditional audiology documents analyzed in a previous study.
resultsCritique and regulatory documents both prioritized values related to reducing barriers to hearing aid access and use, but the lack of a significant correlation in the rank order of values in these documents was evidence of inconsistency between the motivation and implementation of OTC hearing aids. Differences in the rank order of values in the OTC documents compared to traditional audiology were consistent with a values shift.
conclusionsThe introduction of OTC as a solution to low hearing aid use represents a values shift, challenging the values of traditional audiology. This research demonstrates a need to establish the values of hearing health care service delivery through a consensus of stakeholders, including individuals from diverse backgrounds underserved by the traditional model.
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.