↓ Skip to main content

Trends and Predictors of Longitudinal Hearing Aid Use for Children Who Are Hard of Hearing

Overview of attention for article published in Ear and hearing (Print), November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
127 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.
Article details
Title
Trends and Predictors of Longitudinal Hearing Aid Use for Children Who Are Hard of Hearing
Published in
Ear and hearing (Print), November 2015
DOI 10.1097/aud.0000000000000208
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Children who are hard of hearing (CHH) have restricted access to acoustic and linguistic information. Increased audibility provided by hearing aids (HAs) influences language outcomes, but the advantages of appropriately fit HAs can only be realized if children wear their devices on a consistent basis. The purpose of this article was to characterize long-term HA use in CHH, based on parent-report measures, and identify factors that influence longitudinal trends in HA use. Participants were parents of 290 children with mild to severe hearing loss. At every visit, parents estimated the average amount of time the child used HAs per day during the week and on the weekends. Parent reports of daily HA use were analyzed to determine if different patterns of HA use were observed longitudinally during the study. Independent predictor variables were then related to longitudinal trends in HA use within three age groups (infant, preschool, school age). On average across multiple visits, parents reported that their children wore their HAs for 10.63 hr per day (SD = 3.29). Data logging values were lower than parent-report measures (M = 8.44, SD = 4.06), suggesting that parents overestimated daily HA use. The majority of children in each age group wore HAs at least 8 hr per day from their first research testing interval to their last, based on parent-report measures. Maternal education level predicted longitudinal trends in HA use for infants and school-age CHH. Degree of hearing loss was related to trends in school-age children only. These results indicated that the majority of CHH increased HA use over time, but a sizable minority demonstrated a low level of use or decreased use in the time period studied. Maternal education level influenced longitudinal trends in daily HA use. Degree of hearing loss influenced trends in school-age children only. Audiologists and early intervention service providers might aid in improving HA use by providing regular hands-on training with the HAs and individualized problem-based strategies to address the challenges families experience with attaining a high level of use. Families may also benefit from practical demonstrations of the benefits of consistent HA use, such as hearing loss simulations, examples of listening in noise with and without HAs, or listening to malfunctioning HAs.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 126 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 11%
Student > Master 13 10%
Researcher 10 8%
Other 20 16%
Unknown 36 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 25 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 17%
Psychology 13 10%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 40 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 February 2020.
All research outputs
#23,619,422
of 34,763,505 outputs
Outputs from Ear and hearing (Print)
#1,293
of 2,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,007
of 321,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ear and hearing (Print)
#17
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,763,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,290 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 321,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.