Individual Hearing Aid Benefit in Real Life Evaluated Using Ecological Momentary Assessment.

Only 24 adults were studied, and only 16 completed both hearing aid periods. This sample is too small to support general hearing aid benefit claims. The study had no control group or random assignment. Time, expectations, or other changes after fitting cannot be separated from the hearing aids themselves. All outcomes were self-rated momentary reports, not objective communication measures. Participants knew whether they were unaided or aided. The EMA periods were short, from the third to sixth day after handover. Rare but important listening situations may have been missed. Compliance with prompts was variable. The authors note that prompts may have been missed or that usage time may include periods when the system was not worn. Pre-fitting EMA did not predict hearing aid decisions. It is not a clinical screening tool for adoption. The authors discuss possible bias from feedback summaries and from participants' desire for a good outcome after fitting.

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. The work was supported by the Hearing Industry Research Consortium and the Research Fund of Jade University of Applied Sciences, with publication support from Jade University's Open Access Publication Funds.

Do not conclude that hearing aids caused the improvements or that momentary reports can predict hearing aid use. The study had no control group, only 16 participants completed both periods, and pre-fitting reports did not differ between those who later accepted hearing aids and those who cancelled fitting.