ABTRACT
Introduction Hearing loss is a chronic condition affecting 11 million individuals in the UK. People with hearing loss regularly experience difficulties interacting in everyday conversations. These difficulties in communication can result in a person with hearing loss withdrawing from social situations and becoming isolated. While hearing health loss research has largely deployed quantitative methods to investigate various aspects of the condition, qualitative research is becoming more widespread. Grounded theory is a specific qualitative methodology that has been used to establish novel theories on the experiences of living with hearing loss.
Method and analysis The aim of this systematic review is to establish how grounded theory has been applied to investigate the psychosocial aspects of hearing loss. Methods are reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 checklist. Studies included in this review will have applied grounded theory methodology. For a study to be included, it can apply grounded theory as an overarching methodology, or have grounded theory methodology embedded amongst other methodologies. These studies can be in the form of retrospective or prospective studies, before and after comparison studies, RCTs, non-RCTs, cohort studies, prospective observational studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies, longitudinal studies, and mixed method studies. Purely quantitative studies, studies that have not applied grounded theory methodology, articles reporting expert opinions, case reports, practice guidelines, case series, conference abstracts, and book chapters will be excluded. Studies included will have adult participants (≥18 years) who are either people with an acquired hearing loss, their family and friends (communication partners), or audiologists. The quality of application of grounded theory in each study will be assessed using the Guideline for Reporting and Evaluating Grounded Theory Research Studies (GUREGT).
Ethics and dissemination As only secondary data will be used in this systematic review, ethical approval is not required. No other ethical issues are foreseen. The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO) holds the registration record of this systematic review. Findings will be disseminated via peer reviewed publications and at relevant academic conferences. Findings may also be published in relevant professional and third sector newsletters and magazines as appropriate. Data will inform future research and guideline development.
Prospero registration number PROSPERO CRD42019134197
Strengths and limitations of this study
This systematic review is the first to provide a comprehensive critique of the use of grounded theory to investigate hearing loss.
The search strategy was formed in collaboration with an information specialist at the University of Nottingham.
The PRISMA-P guidelines have directed the considerations and layout of this protocol.
Because experiences and articulations of hearing loss are influenced by age, only adult (≥18 years) participants (people with hearing loss, communication partners, audiologists) will be considered.
The search will not include grey literature.
The studies included will only have samples of individuals with hearing loss, rather than full deafness.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
N/A
Funding Statement
This systematic review presents independent research with differing sources of funding. YA is funded by the NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Programme and Sonova Holding AG. Dr Derek Hoare is funded by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre Programme. Dr Helen Henshaw is funded through an NIHR Career Development Fellowship (NIHR Ref: CDF-2018-11-ST2-016). Dr Nicola Wright and Dr David Charnock are funded by the University of Nottingham. Dr Melanie Ferguson is funded by the National Acoustic Laboratories in Australia.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Not Applicable
Any clinical trials involved have been registered with an ICMJE-approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial ID is included in the manuscript.
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant Equator, ICMJE or other checklist(s) as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
N/A
