Hearing Loss Prevalence Among Older US Adults: HRS 2016 to 2018 Hearing Screener Data

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of hearing loss among US adults based on a hearing screening device (HearCheck) in the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), and to compare these estimates with prevalence from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) based on pure-tone audiometry. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: HRS 2016 to 2018 and NHANES 2015 to 2020. METHODS: Study cohort included HRS participants aged ≥55 years who completed HearCheck hearing screening (n = 12,756). Hearing loss was defined using a device score<6 in the better hearing ear. For NHANES audiometry data (n = 2552), hearing loss was defined using pre-defined cut-offs of the speech-frequency pure-tone average (PTA). Prevalence was estimated using survey weights, and the estimates were compared based on two-proportion z-tests. RESULTS: Among adults aged ≥55 years, the prevalence of hearing loss in HRS was 54.8% (95% CI, 53.7%-56.0%), which closely matched the estimated prevalence in NHANES at 54.5% (51.1%-57.8%) when hearing loss was defined as PTA ≥ 20dBHL (P = .82). Further comparing the estimates, the prevalence of mild hearing difficulties (HearCheck score 3-5) in HRS at 48.8% (47.6%-49.9%) matched with the prevalence of mild to moderate hearing loss (20-49dBHL) at 48.2% (45.4%-51.1%) in NHANES (P = .70). The prevalence of moderate to severe difficulties (HearCheck score 0-2) at 6.1% (5.6%-6.5%) in HRS matched with the prevalence of moderately severe or worse hearing loss (≥50dBHL) in NHANES at 6.2% (4.8%-8.0%) (P = .82). CONCLUSION: Hearing loss prevalence estimates derived from a hearing screening device in HRS closely matched those obtained from audiometry in NHANES. While standardized audiometry is preferred, hearing screening tools offer a useful alternative for objectively assessing hearing in large-scale population studies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Otolaryngology
Published
2026-09-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/ohn.70451
Primary Topic
Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Hearing Loss Prevalence Among Older US Adults: HRS 2016 to 2018 Hearing Screener Data

Wendy Jean Mack, Janet S. Choi, Jennifer Ailshire, Eun Young Choi et al.
Otolaryngology
Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
article

Hearing Loss Prevalence Among Older US Adults: HRS 2016 to 2018 Hearing Screener Data

Wendy Jean Mack, Janet S. Choi, Jennifer Ailshire, Eun Young Choi, Eileen M. Crimmins, Zachary Thompson, Jung Ki Kim, Raaif Bokhari
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of hearing loss among US adults based on a hearing screening device (HearCheck) in the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), and to compare these estimates with prevalence from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) based on pure-tone audiometry. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: HRS 2016 to 2018 and NHANES 2015 to 2020. METHODS: Study cohort included HRS participants aged ≥55 years who completed HearCheck hearing screening (n = 12,756). Hearing loss was defined using a device score<6 in the better hearing ear. For NHANES audiometry data (n = 2552), hearing loss was defined using pre-defined cut-offs of the speech-frequency pure-tone average (PTA). Prevalence was estimated using survey weights, and the estimates were compared based on two-proportion z-tests. RESULTS: Among adults aged ≥55 years, the prevalence of hearing loss in HRS was 54.8% (95% CI, 53.7%-56.0%), which closely matched the estimated prevalence in NHANES at 54.5% (51.1%-57.8%) when hearing loss was defined as PTA ≥ 20dBHL (P = .82). Further comparing the estimates, the prevalence of mild hearing difficulties (HearCheck score 3-5) in HRS at 48.8% (47.6%-49.9%) matched with the prevalence of mild to moderate hearing loss (20-49dBHL) at 48.2% (45.4%-51.1%) in NHANES (P = .70). The prevalence of moderate to severe difficulties (HearCheck score 0-2) at 6.1% (5.6%-6.5%) in HRS matched with the prevalence of moderately severe or worse hearing loss (≥50dBHL) in NHANES at 6.2% (4.8%-8.0%) (P = .82). CONCLUSION: Hearing loss prevalence estimates derived from a hearing screening device in HRS closely matched those obtained from audiometry in NHANES. While standardized audiometry is preferred, hearing screening tools offer a useful alternative for objectively assessing hearing in large-scale population studies.

Otolaryngology
University of Southern California (US), Keck Hospital of USC (US)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.