ArticleJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2025
Generational Differences in Audiometric and Self-Reported Hearing and Hearing Aid Use.
Article in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Historical change in midlife trajectories of self-reported sensory functioning across 16 nations.The Gerontologist · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeBirth cohort differences capture secular trends in population health. We aimed to determine birth cohort differences, defined by generation, in hearing-related outcomes.
methodsParticipants were from a community-based cohort study. Generation was classified according to birth year: Greatest (1901-1924), Silent (1925-1945), Baby Boom (1946-1964), Generation X (1965-1980), or Millennial (1981-1996) and Gen Z (1997-2012). Primary outcomes were audiometric hearing loss, defined as a worse ear pure-tone average (PTA) of thresholds at frequencies 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 kHz > 25 dB HL, and self-reported hearing difficulty, defined as a score ≥ 6 on the Revised Hearing Handicap Inventory (RHHI). Analyses focused on hearing aid use included only participants with audiometric hearing loss. We used multivariable adjusted logistic regression models to evaluate associations between generation and each outcome. Models were stratified to sex when there was evidence of effect modification.
resultsThis cross-sectional study included 1554 participants (mean age 63.7 [SD 14.4] years; 56.8% female, 20.0% racial Minority). The prevalence of audiometric hearing loss, self-reported hearing difficulty, and hearing aid use (among participants with audiometric hearing loss) was 48.9%, 48.8%, and 22.0%, respectively. Generation was associated with audiometric hearing loss in the entire sample and males only. Generation was not consistently associated with self-reported hearing difficulty or hearing aid use.
conclusionMore recent generations had lower prevalence of audiometric hearing loss. There were no generational differences in self-reported hearing difficulty or hearing aid use. Secular hearing-related trends can inform accurate projections of the burden of hearing loss and health care utilization.
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.