ArticleGlobal health action2025
Community-based hearing aid fitting model for adults in low-income communities facilitated by community health workers: a feasibility study.
Article in Global health action, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Over-the-counter hearing aids and integrated health-monitoring sensors: a review of clinical evidence and implementation.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Preset Hearing Aid Program Selection in Low-Income Communities: A Longitudinal Study.Audiology research · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHearing loss affects more than 1.5 billion people worldwide, yet fewer than 10% of those who could benefit from hearing aids are able to access them. Barriers such as high costs, limited availability, and a critical shortage of trained professionals in low- and middle-income countries contribute to this gap, while emerging models of care-such as task-shifting to community healthcare workers (CHWs) supported by mHealth technologies-show promise in improving access, affordability, and outcomes in underserved communities.
objectiveTo determine the feasibility and outcomes of a community-based hearing aid fitting model designed for low-income communities facilitated by community health workers (CHWs).
methodUsing Bowen's framework, feasibility was evaluated according to service delivery and patient outcomes. A total of 25 (six male) participants were fitted with bilateral GoPrime preset, over-the-counter (OTC) hearing aids by CHWs in Khayelitsha, a low-income community in Cape Town, South Africa. Benefit and satisfaction were measured using the International Outcome Inventory forHearing Aids (IOI-HA). An open-ended survey used to obtain their perceptions on the impact of the hearing aids on communication, the mHealth program, and willingness to purchase the hearing aids was analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.
resultsPure Tone Average across participants was 57.3 dB HL (11.5 SD) in the left ear and 54 dB HL (14.2 SD) int he right ear. The majority of participants self-reported positive outcomes while using hearing aids, including good hearing in background noise. IOI-HA showed above standardized average scores of 3.91 for daily use, 4.46 for benefit, and 4.58 for satisfaction. 92% of the participants reported the hearing aids as extremely helpful, with 87.5% recommending hearing aids for others with hearing loss. Additionally, participants reported positive experiences with them Health support program and described the program as clear and helpful.
conclusionThe community-based hearing aid fitting model is feasible and demonstrated positive hearing aid outcomes in a low-income community. This approach, supported bymHealth technologies and CHWs, presents a promising solution to address the hearing care gap in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
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.