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.

57/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Participants with prevalent and incident HL showed a faster decline in verbal memory, information processing speed, and executive function than participants without HL. Decline was steady from baseline to 6 and 12 years for prevalent HL, but time-delayed from 6 to 12 years for incident HL. Having a hearing aid did not change associations. Findings support the notion that HL is a risk factor for cognitive decline independent of other dementia risk factors. Onset of HL preceded onset of cognitive decline. HIGHLIGHTS: We examined cognitive change in prevalent and incident hearing loss. Prevalent and incident hearing loss were associated with faster cognitive decline. For prevalent hearing loss, decline was steady from baseline to 6 and 12 years. Onset of hearing loss preceded the onset of cognitive decline. Having a hearing aid did not change the observed associations.

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

APA 7th

Soons, L. M., Deckers, K., Tange, H., van Boxtel, M. P. J., & Köhler, S. (2024). Cognitive change in prevalent and incident hearing loss: The Maastricht Aging Study. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.13606

Vancouver

Soons LM, Deckers K, Tange H, van Boxtel MPJ, Köhler S. Cognitive change in prevalent and incident hearing loss: The Maastricht Aging Study. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2024. doi:10.1002/alz.13606. PMID: 38236753.

BibTeX

@article{soons2024-38236753,
  author  = {Soons, Lion M and Deckers, Kay and Tange, Huibert and van Boxtel, Martin P J and Köhler, Sebastian},
  title   = {{Cognitive change in prevalent and incident hearing loss: The Maastricht Aging Study}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
  year    = {2024},
  doi     = {10.1002/alz.13606},
  pmid    = {38236753},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.13606}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Participants with prevalent and incident HL showed a faster decline in verbal memory, information processing speed, and executive function than participants without HL.
Decline was steady from baseline to 6 and 12 years for prevalent HL, but time-delayed from 6 to 12 years for incident HL.
Having a hearing aid did not change associations.
Findings support the notion that HL is a risk factor for cognitive decline independent of other dementia risk factors.
Onset of HL preceded onset of cognitive decline.

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

Study details

Participants1,823
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 57/100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 32 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 57 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	9 / 10	Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	4 / 5	2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	3 / 4	1,823 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	0 / 2	No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 38236753)
Free to read	— / 2	Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points	32 / 56	Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 32 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 57 out of 100.
Total	57 / 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.

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 →