↓ Skip to main content

Predicting three-month and 12-month post-fitting real-world hearing-aid outcome using pre-fitting acceptable noise level (ANL)

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Audiology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Predicting three-month and 12-month post-fitting real-world hearing-aid outcome using pre-fitting acceptable noise level (ANL)
Published in
International Journal of Audiology, February 2016
DOI 10.3109/14992027.2015.1120892
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Determine the extent to which pre-fitting acceptable noise level (ANL), with or without other predictors such as hearing-aid experience, can predict real-world hearing-aid outcomes at three and 12 months post-fitting. ANLs were measured before hearing-aid fitting. Post-fitting outcome was assessed using the international outcome inventory for hearing aids (IOI-HA) and a hearing-aid use questionnaire. Models that predicted outcomes (successful vs. unsuccessful) were built using logistic regression and several machine learning algorithms, and were evaluated using the cross-validation technique. A total of 132 adults with hearing impairment. The prediction accuracy of the models ranged from 61% to 68% (IOI-HA) and from 55% to 61% (hearing-aid use questionnaire). The models performed more poorly in predicting 12-month than three-month outcomes. The ANL cutoff between successful and unsuccessful users was higher for experienced (∼18 dB) than first-time hearing-aid users (∼10 dB), indicating that most experienced users will be predicted as successful users regardless of their ANLs. Pre-fitting ANL is more useful in predicting short-term (three months) hearing-aid outcomes for first-time users, as measured by the IOI-HA. The prediction accuracy was lower than the accuracy reported by some previous research that used a cross-sectional design.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 40 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 %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 12 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Psychology 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 15 38%
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 16 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Audiology
#980
of 1,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,636
of 412,549 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Audiology
#15
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 412,549 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.