Author
Listed:
- Tess Bright
(International Centre for Evidence in Disability, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK)
- Islay Mactaggart
(International Centre for Evidence in Disability, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK)
- Min Kim
(Tropical Epidemiology Group, Faculty of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK)
- Jennifer Yip
(International Centre for Evidence in Disability, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK)
- Hannah Kuper
(International Centre for Evidence in Disability, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK)
- Sarah Polack
(International Centre for Evidence in Disability, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London WC1E 7HT, UK)
Abstract
Data on the prevalence and causes of hearing loss is lacking from many low and middle-income countries, in part, because all-age population-based surveys of hearing loss can be expensive and time consuming. Restricting samples to older adults would reduce the sample size required, as hearing loss is more prevalent in this group. Population-based surveys of hearing loss require clinicians to be involved in the data collection team and reducing the duration of the survey may help to minimise the impact on service delivery. The objective of this paper was to identify the optimal age-group for conduct of population-based surveys of hearing loss, balancing sample size efficiencies, and expected response rates with ability to make inferences to the all-age population. Methods: Between 2013–2014, two all aged population-based surveys of hearing loss were conducted in one district each of India and Cameroon. Secondary data analysis was conducted to determine the proportion of hearing loss (moderate or greater) in people aged 30+, 40+ and 50+. Poisson regression models were developed to predict the expected prevalence of hearing loss in the whole population, based on the prevalence in people aged 30+, 40+, and 50+, which was compared to the observed prevalence. The distribution of causes in these age groups was also compared to the all-age population. Sample sizes and response rates were estimated to assess which age cut-off is most rapid. Results: Of 160 people in India and 131 in Cameroon with moderate or greater hearing loss, over 70% were older than 50 in both settings. For people aged 30+ (90.6% India; 76.3% Cameroon), 40+ (81% India; 75% Cameroon) and 50+ (73% India; 73% Cameroon) the proportions were higher. Prediction based on Poisson distributed observations the predicted prevalence based on those aged 30+, 40+, and 50+ fell within the confidence intervals of the observed prevalence. The distribution of probable causes of hearing loss in the older age groups was statistically similar to the total population. Sample size calculations and an analysis of response rates suggested that a focus on those aged 50+ would minimise costs the most by reducing the survey duration. Conclusion: Restricting the age group included in surveys of hearing loss, in particular to people aged 50+, would still allow inferences to be made to the total population, and would mean that the required sample size would be smaller, thus reducing the duration of the survey and costs.
Suggested Citation
Tess Bright & Islay Mactaggart & Min Kim & Jennifer Yip & Hannah Kuper & Sarah Polack, 2019.
"Rationale for a Rapid Methodology to Assess the Prevalence of Hearing Loss in Population-Based Surveys,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-16, September.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:18:p:3405-:d:267094
Download full text from publisher
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Dorothy Boggs & Abba Hydara & Yaka Faal & John Atta Okoh & Segun Isaac Olaniyan & Haruna Sanneh & Abdoulie Ngett & Isatou Bah & Mildred Aleser & Erima Denis & Ian McCormick & Tess Bright & Suzannah Be, 2021.
"Estimating Need for Glasses and Hearing Aids in The Gambia: Results from a National Survey and Comparison of Clinical Impairment and Self-Report Assessment Approaches,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-19, June.
- Dorothy Boggs & Hannah Kuper & Islay Mactaggart & Tess Bright & GVS Murthy & Abba Hydara & Ian McCormick & Natalia Tamblay & Matias L. Alvarez & Oluwarantimi Atijosan-Ayodele & Hisem Yonso & Allen Fos, 2022.
"Exploring the Use of Washington Group Questions to Identify People with Clinical Impairments Who Need Services including Assistive Products: Results from Five Population-Based Surveys,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-17, April.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:18:p:3405-:d:267094. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.