Tinnitus Severity Is Reduced with Reduction of Depressive Mood – a Prospective Population Study in Sweden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tinnitus, the perception of sound without external source, is a highly prevalent public health problem with about 8% of the population having frequently occurring tinnitus, and about 1-2% experiencing significant distress from it. Population studies, as well as studies on self-selected samples, have reported poor psychological well-being in individuals with tinnitus. However, no study has examined the long-term co-variation between mood and tinnitus prevalence or tinnitus severity. In this study, the relationship between depression and tinnitus prevalence and severity over a 2-year period was examined in a representative sample of the general Swedish working population. Results show that a decrease in depression is associated with a decrease in tinnitus prevalence, and even more markedly with tinnitus severity. Hearing loss was a more potent predictor than depression for tinnitus prevalence, but was a weaker predictor than depression for tinnitus severity. In addition, there were sex differences for tinnitus prevalence, but not for tinnitus severity. This study shows a direct and long-term association between tinnitus severity and depression.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".