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.

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 57 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology

There has been increasing attention to the role of hearing loss as a potentially modifiable risk factor for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. However, more nationally-representative studies are needed to understand the co-occurring changes in hearing loss and cognitive function in older adults over time, and how hearing aid use might influence this association. The purpose of this report is to examine how age-related changes in hearing loss and hearing aid use are associated with trajectories of cognitive function in a nationally-representative sample of U.S. older adults. We used 11 waves of longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) from 1998 to 2018 to examine changes in self-reported hearing loss, hearing aid use, and cognitive function in adults 65 and older by race and ethnicity. Results from mixed models showed that greater levels of hearing loss were associated with lower levels of cognitive function at age 65 in non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic older adults. We also found that the associations diminished across age in White and Black individuals; but remained persistent in Hispanic individuals. The use of hearing aids was not associated with cognitive function in Black older adults but appeared protective for White and Hispanic older adults. Overall, the findings from this report suggest that the timely identification of hearing loss and subsequent acquisition of hearing aids may be important considerations for reducing declines in cognitive function that manifests differently in U.S. population subgroups.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 57/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 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 left out, no data. 32 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 57 of 100. Total 57 of 100.32 of the 56 points we could judge = 57 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International journal of population studies)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 7 / 12 A longitudinal study following the same people over time
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 3 / 5 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 37304046)
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.

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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

West, J. S., Smith, S. L., & Dupre, M. E. (2022). Self-reported hearing loss, hearing aid use, and cognitive function among U.S. older adults. International journal of population studies. https://doi.org/10.18063/ijps.v8i1.1308

Vancouver

West JS, Smith SL, Dupre ME. Self-reported hearing loss, hearing aid use, and cognitive function among U.S. older adults. International journal of population studies. 2022. doi:10.18063/ijps.v8i1.1308. PMID: 37304046.

BibTeX

@article{west2022-37304046,
  author  = {West, Jessica S and Smith, Sherri L and Dupre, Matthew E},
  title   = {{Self-reported hearing loss, hearing aid use, and cognitive function among U.S. older adults}},
  journal = {International journal of population studies},
  year    = {2022},
  doi     = {10.18063/ijps.v8i1.1308},
  pmid    = {37304046},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.18063/ijps.v8i1.1308}
}

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 →