Thoren 2014.

Methods	Randomised
Participants	N = 76 (38 in each group) Age range: 26 to 81 years Gender: 32 women, 44 men Inclusion criteria: 1 year + HA use, over 18 years of age, significant hearing impairment and significant communication difficulties
Interventions	Online rehabilitation for hearing aid users including self‐study, training and professional coaching in hearing physiology, hearing aids and communication strategies, as well as online contact with peers across 5 weekly modules. The intervention group was compared to a waiting list control group
Outcomes	Short‐term: immediately following intervention, IOI‐HA, HHEI and HADS Medium‐term: at 3 months measures repeated
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "The participants were randomized by an independent person (not involved in the study or recruitment) to either participate in the intervention group or in the control group." Comment: insufficient information about the sequence generation process in study
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Comment: the use of an independent person performing the randomisation is suggestive of allocation concealment
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not blinded
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Missing outcome data balanced in numbers across intervention groups; it was explained and due to attrition. Missing data were imputed using appropriate methods.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No protocol available
Other bias	Unclear risk	Quote: "Of the participants, 75% had completed education at university level." Comment: study appears to have a risk of recruitment bias