ArticleAmerican journal of audiology2026
Time Matters: Possible Predictors of the Number of Appointments During the First Year After Hearing Aid Fitting.
Article in American journal of audiology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFollow-up care after hearing aid fitting is recommended, yet clinicians lack data on the expected number of follow-up appointments needed and which patients require more support. This study aimed to characterize follow-up service utilization during the first year after hearing aid fitting and to determine whether patient, device, or cost-related factors may predict the number of follow-up appointments.
methodA retrospective chart review was conducted on 223 adult patients who received hearing aids at a university-affiliated audiology clinic between May 2022 and April 2023. Demographic, audiological, device-specific, and cost-related data were extracted. The number of follow-up appointments over 1 year was used as the primary outcome. Negative binomial regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of follow-up service utilization.
resultsPatients attended an average of 4.1 follow-up appointments (range: 1-16), with most attending three to five visits. No significant effects were observed for gender, degree of hearing loss, or language. Effects of age and prior hearing aid experience were identified with older patients and those with over 10 years of prior hearing aid use attending more appointments. Device factors, including dispensing of accessories and dispensing of standard-level technology, were associated with increased follow-up utilization. Patients with higher out-of-pocket (OOP) costs or no insurance coverage attended more appointments, though cost and technology level exhibited interdependencies.
conclusionsOverall, most adult hearing aid patients attended approximately three to five appointments over the first year, and most demographic and audiometric factors did not predict follow-up appointment attendance. However, on average, patients with higher OOP costs and those with an accessory attended more appointments. Clinicians can use these data to provide evidence-based counseling to patients and to inform clinical 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.