The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hearing aids for mild to moderate hearing loss in adults
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The main clinical intervention for mild to moderate hearing loss is the provision of hearing aids. These are routinely offered and fitted to those who seek help for hearing difficulties. By amplifying and improving access to sounds, and speech sounds in particular, the aim of hearing aid use is to reduce the negative consequences of hearing loss and improve participation in everyday life. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of hearing aids for mild to moderate hearing loss in adults. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the ENT Trials Register; the Cochrane Register of Studies Online; MEDLINE; PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 23 March 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of hearing aids compared to a passive or active control in adults with mild to moderate hearing loss. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes in this review were hearing-specific health-related quality of life and the adverse effect pain. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, listening ability and the adverse effect noise-induced hearing loss. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs involving 825 participants. The studies were carried out in the USA and Europe, and were published between 1987 and 2017. Risk of bias across the studies varied. Most had low risk for selection, reporting and attrition bias, and a high risk for performance and detection bias because blinding was inadequate or absent.All participants had mild to moderate hearing loss. The average age across all five studies was between 69 and 83 years. The duration of the studies ranged between six weeks and six months.There was a large beneficial effect of hearing aids on hearing-specific health-related quality of life associated with participation in daily life as measured using the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly (HHIE, scale range 1 to 100) compared to the unaided/placebo condition (mean difference (MD) -26.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) -42.16 to -10.77; 722 participants; three studies) (moderate-quality evidence).There was a small beneficial effect of hearing aids on general health-related quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.38, 95% CI -0.55 to -0.21; 568 participants; two studies) (moderate-quality evidence). There was a large beneficial effect of hearing aids on listening ability (SMD -1.88, 95% CI -3.24 to -0.52; 534 participants; two studies) (moderate-quality evidence).Adverse effects were measured in only one study (48 participants) and none were reported (very low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence concurs that hearing aids are effective at improving hearing-specific health-related quality of life, general health-related quality of life and listening ability in adults with mild to moderate hearing loss. The evidence is compatible with the widespread provision of hearing aids as the first-line clinical management in those who seek help for hearing difficulties. Greater consistency is needed in the choice of outcome measures used to assess benefits from hearing aids. Further placebo-controlled studies would increase our confidence in the estimates of these effects and ascertain whether they vary according to age, gender, degree of hearing loss and type of hearing aid.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1992) · PubMed · Cited by 33,716
The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection
Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002 · Cited by 30,033
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
EQ-SD: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group
Rabin, R., & Charro, F. D. (2001) · Annals of Medicine · doi:10.3109/07853890109002087 · Cited by 5,613
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J., Bossuyt, P., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T., mulrow, C., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J., Akl, E., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2020) · doi:10.31222/osf.io/v7gm2 · Cited by 5,177
International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF)
Battistella, L. R., & Brito, C. M. M. D. (2002) · Acta Fisiátrica · doi:10.5935/0104-7795.20020003 · Cited by 4,446
A new system for grading recommendations in evidence based guidelines
Harbour, R., & Miller, J. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7308.334 · Cited by 1,637
Hearing Loss and Incident Dementia
Lin, F. R., Metter, E. J., O’Brien, R. J., Resnick, S. M., Zonderman, A. B., & Ferrucci, L. (2011) · Archives of Neurology · doi:10.1001/archneurol.2010.362 · Cited by 1,539
The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ)
Gatehouse, S., & Noble, W. (2004) · International Journal of Audiology · doi:10.1080/14992020400050014 · Cited by 1,385
Hearing Impairment and Cognitive Energy: The Framework for Understanding Effortful Listening (FUEL)
Pichora-Fuller, M. K., Kramer, S. E., Eckert, M. A., Edwards, B., Hornsby, B. W. Y., Humes, L. E., Lemke, U., Lunner, T., Matthen, M., Mackersie, C. L., et al. (2016) · Ear & Hearing · doi:10.1097/aud.0000000000000312 · Cited by 1,318
Cited by
A multidisciplinary European guideline for tinnitus: diagnostics, assessment, and treatment
Cima, R. F. F., Mazurek, B., Haider, H., Kikidis, D., Lapira, A., Noreña, A., & Hoare, D. J. (2019) · HNO · doi:10.1007/s00106-019-0633-7 · Cited by 442
Self-citationSound therapy (using amplification devices and/or sound generators) for tinnitus.
Sereda, M., Xia, J., El Refaie, A., Hall, D. A., & Hoare, D. J. (2018) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013094.pub2 · Cited by 135
Self-citationClinical update on sensorineural hearing loss in Turner syndrome and the X-chromosome
Bonnard, Å., Bark, R., & Hederstierna, C. (2019) · American Journal of Medical Genetics Part C Seminars in Medical Genetics · doi:10.1002/ajmg.c.31673 · Cited by 38
Gender Differences in the Association Between Hearing Loss and Cognitive Function
Huang, B., Cao, G., Duan, Y., Yan, S., Yan, M., Yin, P., & Jiang, H. (2020) · American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease & Other Dementias® · doi:10.1177/1533317519871167 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Ferguson, M. A., Kitterick, P. T., Chong, L. Y., Edmondson-Jones, M., Barker, F., & Hoare, D. J.
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-09-25
- Volume
- 2017
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- CD012023-CD012023
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- OpenAlex
- W2203446958
- Cited by
- 375
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 13.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hearing aids for mild to moderate hearing loss in adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd012023.pub2
- The paper
- Ferguson, M. A., Kitterick, P. T., Chong, L. Y., Edmondson-Jones, M., Barker, F., & Hoare, D. J. (2017). Hearing aids for mild to moderate hearing loss in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd012023.pub2
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.