Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2020 Jan 27;15(1):e0228349.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228349. eCollection 2020.

Assessing hearing loss in older adults with a single question and person characteristics; Comparison with pure tone audiometry in the Rotterdam Study

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Assessing hearing loss in older adults with a single question and person characteristics; Comparison with pure tone audiometry in the Rotterdam Study

Berthe C Oosterloo et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Introduction: Hearing loss (HL) is a frequent problem among the elderly and has been studied in many cohort studies. However, pure tone audiometry-the gold standard-is rather time-consuming and costly for large population-based studies. We have investigated if self-reported hearing loss, using a multiple choice question, can be used to assess HL in absence of pure tone audiometry.

Methods: This study was performed within 4,906 participants of the Rotterdam Study. The question (in Dutch) that was investigated was: 'Do you have any difficulty with your hearing (without hearing aids)?'. The answer options were: 'never', 'sometimes', 'often' and 'daily'. Mild hearing loss or worse was defined as PTA0.5-4(Pure Tone Average 0.5, 1, 2 & 4 kHz) ≥20dBHL and moderate HL or worse as ≥35dBHL. A univariable linear regression model was fitted with the PTA0.5-4 and the answer to the question. Subsequently, sex, age and education were added in a multivariable linear regression model. The ability of the question to classify HL, accounting for sex, age and education, was explored through logistic regression models creating prediction estimates, which were plotted in ROC curves.

Results: The variance explained (R2) by the univariable regression was 0.37, which increased substantially after adding age (R2 = 0.60). The addition of sex and educational level, however, did not alter the R2 (0.61). The ability of the question to classify hearing loss, reflected in the area under the curve (AUC), was 0.70 (95% CI 0.68, 0.71) for mild hearing loss or worse and 0.86 (95% CI 0.85, 0.87) for moderate hearing loss or worse. The AUC increased substantially when sex, education and age were taken into account (AUC mild HL: 0.73 (95%CI 0.71, 0.75); moderate HL 0.90 (95%CI 0.89, 0.91)).

Conclusion: Self-reported hearing loss using a single question has a good ability to detect hearing loss in older adults, especially when age is accounted for. A single question cannot substitute audiometry, but it can assess hearing loss on a population level with reasonable accuracy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: AG received funding from Cochlear Ltd. BCO and AG also received funding from Heinsius Houbolt fonds. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products to declare.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Distribution of answers to the question: ‘Do you have any difficulty with your hearing?’.
Per 15dB hearing loss (PTA0.5–4) in the better ear.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Results from the linear regression analysis for the question: ‘Do you have any difficulty with your hearing?’.
First univariable analysis was done, then each of the independent covariates were added, initially separately and later together. R2 is given as a measure of the goodness of fit of the model.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Homans NC, Metselaar RM, Dingemanse JG, van der Schroeff MP, Brocaar MP, Wieringa MH, et al. Prevalence of age-related hearing loss, including sex differences, in older adults in a large cohort study. Laryngoscope. 2017;127(3):725–30. Epub 2016/07/06. 10.1002/lary.26150 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Moscicki EK, Elkins EF, Baum HM, McNamara PM. Hearing loss in the elderly: an epidemiologic study of the Framingham Heart Study Cohort. Ear Hear. 1985;6(4):184–90. Epub 1985/07/01. . - PubMed
    1. Roth TN, Hanebuth D, Probst R. Prevalence of age-related hearing loss in Europe: a review. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;268(8):1101–7. Epub 2011/04/19. 10.1007/s00405-011-1597-8 [pii]. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3132411. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. World Health Organisation W. Grades of hearing impairment [World Health Organisation Web site]. 2015. Available from: http://www.who.int/pbd/deafness/hearing_impairment_grades/en/.
    1. Lin FR, Yaffe K, Xia J, Xue QL, Harris TB, Purchase-Helzner E, et al. Hearing loss and cognitive decline in older adults. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(4):293–9. Epub 2013/01/23. 1558452 [pii] 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.1868 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types