ArticleOtolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery2025
Validation of the Hearing Utility Measure (HUM) in Cochlear Implant Candidates and Users.
Article in Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo validate the Hearing Utility Measure (HUM), a tool designed to quantify hearing loss impact on health and quality of life for use in economic evaluation. STUDY
designProspective cohort.
settingTertiary academic center.
methodsCochlear implant (CI) candidates were enrolled between June 25, 2020, and March 17, 2024. Participants completed HUM alongside other assessments, including Health Utilities Index, Mark-3 (HUI-3), Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ-49), Cochlear Implant Quality of Life Profile (CIQOL-35), and Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) at the time of CI evaluation and 12 months post-activation. A subgroup with stable hearing status completed HUM twice, 6 months apart, to assess test-retest reliability.
resultsAmong 1315 participants, HUM showed strong correlations with CIQOL-global (r = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.66-0.72) and SSQ-overall (r = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.67-0.73), supporting construct validity. HUM Tinnitus domain correlated negatively with THI (-0.75; -0.77, -0.73), as expected. Test-retest reliability was excellent (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient [ICC] 0.90, 95% CI: 0.83-0.94). HUM hearing utility was higher for candidates with single-sided deafness (SSD) (0.76) than with traditional and asymmetric hearing loss (0.58, P < .001). Median HUM improved from 0.70 to 0.78 for SSD recipients (P = .002) and 0.57 to 0.75 for traditional recipients (P < .001).
conclusionHUM is a reliable, valid, and responsive measure of hearing-related health in adults with advanced hearing loss. Unlike traditional instruments such as SSQ and CIQOL, which capture patient-reported outcomes but are not designed for economic analysis, HUM is a preference-based utility instrument that enables cost-effectiveness evaluation. It outperforms the available HUI-3 by better reflecting hearing loss impact and complements existing nonutility instruments used in clinical and health policy decision-making.
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.