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.

44/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Participants with impaired hearing (n = 179) were older (73.9 vs. 71.4 years, p <0.001), often male (61.5% vs. 36.5%, p <0.001), and had lower cognitive scores than normal-hearing individuals (n = 241). Both PACC and MoCA assessments showed similar results, with impaired-hearing participants performing worse on PACC (-0.35 vs. 0.009, p <0.001) and MoCA (23.9 vs. 25.7, p <0.001). Race distributions differed (p = 0.009), but neighborhood-level deprivation (p = 0.518) did not. In adjusted models, higher (worse) WIN thresholds were significantly associated with lower cognitive scores (p <0.01) in MoCA and PACC, controlling for age, sex, race, education, and neighborhood noise levels. Hearing aid use was associated with higher PACC scores (p = 0.003), suggesting a protective effect on cognitive function. However, HHI scores were still not significantly related to cognitive outcomes. All interaction terms were not significant. Hearing impairment is significantly associated with lower cognitive performance, while hearing aid use may provide cognitive benefits. However, self-reported hearing difficulty (HHI) was not a significant predictor of cognition, highlighting the importance of objective hearing assessments.

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

APA 7th

Bekena, S., Singh, R. K., Zhu, Y., Damera, N., Taylor, K., Trani, J., et al. (2025). Hearing Impairment, Hearing Aid Use, and Cognitive Outcomes in Older Adults: A Cross‐Sectional Study. Alzheimer s & Dementia. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz70860_106643

Vancouver

Bekena S, Singh RK, Zhu Y, Damera N, Taylor K, Trani J, et al. Hearing Impairment, Hearing Aid Use, and Cognitive Outcomes in Older Adults: A Cross‐Sectional Study. Alzheimer s & Dementia. 2025. doi:10.1002/alz70860_106643. PMID: 41433879.

BibTeX

@article{bekena2025-41433879,
  author  = {Bekena, Semere and Singh, Ramkrishna Kumar and Zhu, Yu and Damera, Nikitha and Taylor, Kaylin and Trani, Jean‐Francois and Babulal, Ganesh Muneshwar},
  title   = {{Hearing Impairment, Hearing Aid Use, and Cognitive Outcomes in Older Adults: A Cross‐Sectional Study}},
  journal = {Alzheimer s \& Dementia},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1002/alz70860_106643},
  pmid    = {41433879},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz70860_106643}
}

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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Participants with impaired hearing (n = 179) were older (73.9 vs. 71.4 years, p <0.001), often male (61.5% vs. 36.5%, p <0.001), and had lower cognitive scores than normal-hearing individuals (n = 241).
Both PACC and MoCA assessments showed similar results, with impaired-hearing participants performing worse on PACC (-0.35 vs. 0.009, p <0.001) and MoCA (23.9 vs. 25.7, p <0.001).
Race distributions differed (p = 0.009), but neighborhood-level deprivation (p = 0.518) did not.
In adjusted models, higher (worse) WIN thresholds were significantly associated with lower cognitive scores (p <0.01) in MoCA and PACC, controlling for age, sex, race, education, and neighborhood noise levels.
Hearing aid use was associated with higher PACC scores (p = 0.003), suggesting a protective effect on cognitive function.

Why it matters

In this cross-sectional study, people with hearing impairment scored lower on cognitive tests than those with normal hearing, and hearing aid use was linked to higher scores on one cognitive measure. Because the study looked at people at a single point in time, it cannot show whether hearing aids prevent or slow cognitive decline.

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

Study details

Study designcross-sectional
Participants179
Effect size61.5%; 36.5%
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 44/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer s & Dementia)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	Alzheimer s & Dementia: journal h-index 228 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	4 / 12	A snapshot of people at one point in time
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	2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	2 / 4	179 participants
Effect reported	2 / 3	Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
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	0 / 7	Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	0 / 5	0.0 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year	0 / 6	Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	0 / 4	Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Ganesh Muneshwar Babulal: h-index 31 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	2 / 3	Washington University in St. Louis: institution h-index 1,962 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 3 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41433879)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	44 / 100	—

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

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Related studies in Risk factors

Also tagged “controlled”

1,118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “controlled”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,118 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Risk factors

See all studies in Risk factors →