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 53 out of 100. Prevention and risk

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Across imputed data sets, a median of 2,777 eligible individuals were included, with a median of 664 receiving a new HA prescription. The mean age was 75 years, and 48% were female. The estimated 7-year mean overall cognition scores among survivors were similar under HA prescription and no HA prescription (mean difference 0.03 SDs; 95% CI -0.14 to 0.21). The estimated 7-year risk of dementia was 5.0% under HA prescription and 7.5% under no HA prescription (risk ratio [RR] 0.67; 95% CI 0.37-0.97), and that of cognitive impairment was 36.1% under HA prescription and 42.4% under no HA prescription (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.70-1.00). The risks of dementia and cognitive impairment were inversely associated with the frequency of HA use. We found that HA use in older people with hearing impairment may reduce dementia risk, although differences in age-related cognitive change were insubstantial. We cannot rule out residual confounding as an explanation for our findings. Long-term randomized trials of HAs for dementia risk are justified. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that the use of hearing aids did not change overall cognitive scores in people 70 years and older with moderate hearing impairment as compared to those who used hearing aids.

Key findings

Why it matters

In this observational study, hearing aid use in older people with hearing impairment was associated with a lower estimated 7-year risk of dementia, but overall cognition scores were similar with and without hearing aids. The authors say residual confounding cannot be ruled out and that long-term randomized trials are needed.

Study details

How this study scored 53/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record 4 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 5 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 1 of 7; Citations per year 1 of 5; Impact for its field and year 4 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 1 of 4; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record 2 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 3 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 51 of the 96 points it could be judged on, which is 53 of 100. Total 53 of 100.51 of the 96 points we could judge = 53 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 51 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 53 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology)
Journal's citation record 4 / 4 Neurology: journal h-index 525 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 5 / 5 2026 — within 1 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 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
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 1 / 7 Cited 4 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 1 / 5 2.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026
Impact for its field and year 4 / 6 Cited 17.8× 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 1 / 4 Cited 4 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record — / 4 OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Joanne Ryan holds only 2 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score
Institution's track record 2 / 3 University of Minnesota: institution h-index 1,568 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 3 / 3 OpenAlex lists 10 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41534012)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 51 / 96 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 51 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 53 out of 100.
Total 53 / 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).

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

Cribb, L., Moreno‐Betancur, M., Pase, M. P., Wolfe, R., Britt, C. J., Zhou, Z. H., et al. (2026). Treating Hearing Loss With Hearing Aids for the Prevention of Cognitive Decline and Dementia. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000214572

Vancouver

Cribb L, Moreno‐Betancur M, Pase MP, Wolfe R, Britt CJ, Zhou ZH, et al. Treating Hearing Loss With Hearing Aids for the Prevention of Cognitive Decline and Dementia. Neurology. 2026. doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000214572. PMID: 41534012.

BibTeX

@article{cribb2026-41534012,
  author  = {Cribb, Lachlan and Moreno‐Betancur, Margarita and Pase, Matthew Paul and Wolfe, Rory and Britt, Carlene J. and Zhou, Zhen Hua and Shah, Raj C. and Rance, Gary and others},
  title   = {{Treating Hearing Loss With Hearing Aids for the Prevention of Cognitive Decline and Dementia}},
  journal = {Neurology},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.1212/wnl.0000000000214572},
  pmid    = {41534012},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000214572}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

In the news

1 news article on alzhub's news page cites this paper.

Related studies in Prevention and risk

Similar studies

More on Prevention and risk

See all studies in Prevention and risk →