ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026
An Explainable Machine Learning Framework for Predicting Hearing Aid Satisfaction: Integrating the HATASS Instrument and Clinical Insights.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hearing aid technology adaptation and user satisfaction are influenced by multiple interacting demographic, clinical, and behavioral factors, making reliable prediction of outcomes challenging with conventional statistical approaches alone. This study proposes an explainable machine learning framework to investigate the multidimensional determinants of hearing aid satisfaction by integrating demographic characteristics, hearing aid-related variables, and patient-reported outcomes obtained from the Hearing Aid Technology Adaptation and Satisfaction Scale (HATASS). Five regression algorithms-Linear Regression, Decision Tree Regression (DTR), Random Forest Regression (RFR), Support Vector Regression, and Gradient Boosting Regression (GBR)-were comparatively evaluated using a five-fold cross-validation strategy. Predictive performance was assessed using the root mean square error (RMSE), mean absolute error (MAE), and the coefficient of determination (R2), while model interpretability was investigated through cross-validated out-of-bag permutation feature importance analysis. Among the evaluated algorithms, Random Forest Regression achieved the most consistent predictive performance, yielding the lowest average RMSE (14.225) and the highest average R2 (0.146) under the adopted validation framework. Although the overall predictive performance remained modest, the explainability analysis consistently identified age as the most influential predictor, followed by onset year, education level, hearing aid usage duration, and daily hearing aid use. In contrast, gender, battery type, tinnitus, and vertigo contributed comparatively less to model predictions. These findings indicate that hearing aid adaptation and satisfaction arise from complex nonlinear interactions among demographic, behavioral, clinical, and device-related characteristics rather than isolated linear associations. The proposed framework provides an interpretable, internally validated analytical approach for investigating hearing aid technology adaptation and satisfaction and establishes a foundation for future studies that integrate comprehensive audiological measurements, longitudinal follow-up data, and independent external validation to support the development of more transparent and personalized hearing healthcare systems.
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.