Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 624

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quality-of-Life Changes and Hearing Impairment: A Randomized Trial

Mulrow, Cynthia D., Aguilar, Christine, Endicott, James E., Tuley, Michael R., Velez, Ramon, Charlip, Walter S., Rhodes, Mary C., Hill, Judith A., DeNino, Louis A.·1990·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether hearing aids improve the quality of life of elderly persons with hearing loss. SETTING: Primary care clinics at a Bureau of Veterans Affairs hospital. PATIENTS: One hundred and ninety-four elderly veterans who were identified as being hearing impaired from a screening survey involving 771 consecutive clinic patients. Of the original 194, 188 (97%) completed the trial. INTERVENTION: Subjects were randomly assigned to either receive a hearing aid (n = 95) or join a waiting list (n = 99). MAIN ENDPOINTS: A comprehensive battery of disease-specific and generic quality-of-life measures were administered at baseline, 6 weeks, and 4 months. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Persons assigned to the two groups were similar in age, ethnicity, education, marital status, occupation, and comorbid diseases. At baseline, 82% of subjects reported adverse effects on quality of life due to hearing impairment, and 24% were depressed. At follow-up, a significant change in score improvements for social and emotional function (34.0; 95% CI, 27.3 to 40.8; P less than 0.0001), communication function (24.2; CI, 17.2 to 31.2; P less than 0.0001), cognitive function (0.28; CI, 0.08 to 0.48; P = 0.008), and depression (0.80; CI, 0.09 to 1.51; P = 0.03) was seen in subjects who received hearing aids compared with those assigned to the waiting list. Six drop-outs (three per group), no crossovers, and no significant changes in cointerventions were seen. Average, self-reported, daily aid use in the hearing aid group was 8 hours. CONCLUSION: Hearing loss is associated with important adverse effects on the quality of life of elderly persons, effects which are reversible with hearing aids.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/0003-4819-113-3-188

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 624

Metadata

Authors
Mulrow, C. D., Aguilar, C., Endicott, J. E., Tuley, M. R., Velez, R., Charlip, W. S., Rhodes, M. C., Hill, J. A., & DeNino, L. A.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
1990-08-01
Volume
113
Issue
3
Pages
188-194
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2033035146
Cited by
624
References
2
FWCI
2.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Quality-of-Life Changes and Hearing Impairment: A Randomized Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/0003-4819-113-3-188
The paper
Mulrow, C. D., Aguilar, C., Endicott, J. E., Tuley, M. R., Velez, R., Charlip, W. S., Rhodes, M. C., Hill, J. A., & DeNino, L. A. (1990). Quality-of-Life Changes and Hearing Impairment: A Randomized Trial. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-113-3-188

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.