↓ Skip to main content

Level of User Satisfaction with Hearing Aids and Environment: The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids

Overview of attention for article published in International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Level of User Satisfaction with Hearing Aids and Environment: The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids
Published in
International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, January 2014
DOI 10.1055/s-0033-1363782
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lorena Kozlowski, Gleide Almeida, Angela Ribas

Abstract

Introduction The main function of hearing is to enable oral communication. Hearing loss impairs communication skills. Objective To evaluate the level of user satisfaction with hearing aids. Methods This is a cross-sectional group study comprising 108 subjects (56% men and 44% women). The average age of the subjects was 77 years. These subjects had been recently fitted with their hearing aids and showed sensorineural (90%) and mixed (10%) hearing loss as determined via the Questionnaire International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids Outcome Inventory (IOI-HA), which determined the benefit and satisfaction obtained by sound amplification. Results The hearing aids improved the quality of life of 52.78% of the patients, which was revealed by their high scores (mean = 27.3). The relationship of the user with the environment was significantly better (p < 0.001) than that of the user with the hearing aid. Conclusion IOI-HA is a simple and easy-to-use tool. Based on the results of this study, we can show a high degree of satisfaction with their hearing aids in the majority of the participants, which improved the quality of life.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Other 7 23%
Unknown 6 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 30%
Neuroscience 5 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Computer Science 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 7 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2015.
All research outputs
#18,376,056
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#223
of 645 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,810
of 304,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#23
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 645 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 304,490 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.