Auditory Intervention Program for Older Adults with Cognitive Impairment: Systematic Review and Metaanalysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The elderly population is particularly susceptible to the development of age‐related hearing loss and cognitive impairment. The gradual decline in auditory perception often goes unnoticed, leading to a detrimental impact on their quality of life, mental well‐being, and overall communication skills. Extensive research indicates that prolonged social isolation can exacerbate cognitive decline. Fortunately, hearing intervention has the potential to prevent this devastating consequence. Method Three independent reviewers meticulously reviewed the selected articles. The Covidence was utilized to identify and eliminate any duplicate publications. In cases of disagreement, a fourth reviewer was consulted for adjudication. For inclusion criteria, the studies had to be in the English language and conducted on a population aged 50 years or older who were diagnosed with cognitive impairment. Animal studies and those lacking control groups (either healthy controls or pre‐ and post‐intervention tests) were excluded. We utilized the National Institute of Health (NIH) criteria for evaluating the quality of studies. Result Out of the initial 7,069 search results, we selected 39 articles for inclusion in this study. Among these, the majority comprised randomized trials (10 out of 39) and pre‐ and post‐intervention tests (10 out of 39). The hearing interventions were categorized into four distinct groups: hearing aids, cochlear implants, medication, and sound therapy. It was observed that medication showed the least efficacy while hearing aids and cochlear implants demonstrated the most significant improvements. Following the prescription of hearing aids and cochlear implants, patients experienced enhanced quality of life, despite significant improvement not only in cognition but also in psychological and social well‐being. Additionally, sound therapy exhibited promising results in terms of stress relief and improvement in instrumental and lyric recognition among cognitively impaired patients. Conclusion Our findings indicate that hearing aids, cochlear implants, and sound therapy significantly enhance psychological and social health in individuals with cognitive impairment or dementia. Furthermore, there is a statistically significant improvement in quality of life with appropriate hearing interventions. However, we observed no substantial improvement in cognitive status as assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE), although there is a suggestive trend towards cognitive enhancement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".