alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Home › Research › Risk factors

A randomized feasibility pilot trial of hearing treatment for reducing cognitive decline: Results from the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders Pilot Study

Deal JA, Albert MS, Arnold M, Bangdiwala SI, Chisolm T, Davis S, Eddins A, Glynn NW et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.), 2017-06-21

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 81 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Introduction Hearing loss (HL) is prevalent and independently related to cognitive decline and dementia. There has never been a randomized trial to test if HL treatment could reduce cognitive decline in older adults. Methods A 40-person (aged 70-84 years) pilot study in Washington County, MD, was conducted. Participants were randomized 1:1 to a best practices hearing or successful aging intervention and followed for 6 months. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02412254. Results The Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders Pilot (ACHIEVE-P) Study demonstrated feasibility in recruitment, retention, and implementation of interventions with no treatment-related adverse events. A clear efficacy signal of the hearing intervention was observed in perceived hearing handicap (mean of 0.11 to -1.29 standard deviation [SD] units; lower scores better) and memory (mean of -0.10 SD to 0.38 SD). Discussion ACHIEVE-P sets the stage for the full-scale ACHIEVE trial (N = 850, recruitment beginning November 2017), the first randomized trial to determine efficacy of a best practices hearing (vs. successful aging) intervention on reducing cognitive decline in older adults with HL.

Key findings

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →

Study details

How this study scored 81/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 47 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 81 of 100. Total 81 of 100.47 of the 58 points we could judge = 81 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 47 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 81 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.))
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 11 / 12 A randomised controlled trial
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2017 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 850 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 1 / 2 Randomised (as stated in the record)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 29067347)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 47 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 47 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 81 out of 100.
Total 81 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Deal, J. A., Albert, M. S., Arnold, M., Bangdiwala, S. I., Chisolm, T., Davis, S., et al. (2017). A randomized feasibility pilot trial of hearing treatment for reducing cognitive decline: Results from the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders Pilot Study. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trci.2017.06.003

Vancouver

Deal JA, Albert MS, Arnold M, Bangdiwala SI, Chisolm T, Davis S, et al. A randomized feasibility pilot trial of hearing treatment for reducing cognitive decline: Results from the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders Pilot Study. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.). 2017. doi:10.1016/j.trci.2017.06.003. PMID: 29067347.

BibTeX

@article{deal2017-29067347,
  author  = {Deal, J. A. and Albert, M. S. and Arnold, M. and Bangdiwala, S. I. and Chisolm, T. and Davis, S. and Eddins, A. and Glynn, N. W. and others},
  title   = {{A randomized feasibility pilot trial of hearing treatment for reducing cognitive decline: Results from the Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders Pilot Study}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia (New York, N. Y.)},
  year    = {2017},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.trci.2017.06.003},
  pmid    = {29067347},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trci.2017.06.003}
}

Related studies in Risk factors

Also tagged “hearing”

118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “hearing”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 118 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Risk factors

See all studies in Risk factors →