↓ Skip to main content

Generic quality of life in persons with hearing loss: a systematic literature review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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
Generic quality of life in persons with hearing loss: a systematic literature review
Published in
BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12901-018-0051-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Øyvind Nordvik, Peder O. Laugen Heggdal, Jonas Brännström, Flemming Vassbotn, Anne Kari Aarstad, Hans Jørgen Aarstad

Abstract

To the best of our knowledge, no empirically based consensus has been reached as to if, and to what extent, persons with hearing loss (HL) have reduced generic Quality of life (QoL). There seems to be limited knowledge regarding to what extent a hearing aid (HA) would improve QoL. The main aim of the present study was to review studies about the relationship between HL and QoL. A supporting aim was to study the association between distress and HL. Literature databases (Cinahl, Pub Med and Web of Science) were searched to identify relevant journal articles published in the period from January 2000 to March 17, 2016. We performed a primary search pertaining to the relationship between HL, HA and QoL (search number one) followed by a supporting search pertaining to the relationship between distress/mood/anxiety and HL (search number two). After checking for duplications and screening the titles of the papers, we read the abstracts of the remaining papers. The most relevant papers were read thoroughly, leaving us with the journal articles that met the inclusion criteria. Twenty journal articles were included in the present review: 13 were found in the primary search (HL and QoL), and seven in the supporting search (HL and distress). The literature yields equivocal findings regarding the association between generic QoL and HL. A strong association between distress and HL was shown, where distressed persons tend to have a lowered generic QoL. It is suggested that QoL is lowered among HL patients. Some studies suggest an increased generic QoL following the use of HA, especially during the first few months after initiation of treatment. Other studies suggest that HA use is one of several possible factors that contribute to improve generic QoL. The majority of the studies suggest that HL is associated with reduced generic QoL. Using hearing aids seem to improve general QoL at follow-up within the first year. HL is a risk factor for distress. Further research is needed to explore the relationship between HL and generic QoL, in addition to the importance of influencing variables on this relationship.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 140 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 39 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 16%
Psychology 10 7%
Engineering 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 44 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 30 June 2023.
All research outputs
#3,037,855
of 24,176,645 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
#7
of 83 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,846
of 448,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,176,645 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 448,790 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them