MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3054856469 · doi:10.1097/mao.0000000000002848

Noise Damage Accelerates Auditory Aging and Tinnitus: A Canadian Population-Based Study

2020· article· en· W3054856469 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zahra Jafari, Thomas Copps, Glenn Hole, Bryan Kolb, Majid H. Mohajerani

Bibliographic record

VenueOtology & Neurotology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTinnitusMedicineAudiologyHearing lossPopulationAudiometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Age-related hearing loss (ARHL) is the third most challenging disability in older adults. Noise is a known modifiable risk factor of ARHL, which can drive adverse health effects. Few large-scale studies, however, have shown how chronic noise exposure (CNE) impacts the progression of ARHL and tinnitus. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective large-scale study. SETTING: Audiology clinical practice. PATIENTS: In this study, 928 individuals aged 30-100 years without (n=497) or with the experience of CNE (n=431) were compared in their hearing assessments and tinnitus. In order to only investigate the impact of CNE on ARHL and tinnitus, people with other risk factors of hearing loss were excluded from the study. INTERVENTION: Diagnostic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Noise damage was associated with a greater ARHL per age decades (pure-tone average(PTA)0.5-4kHz alterations 19.6-70.8 dB vs. 8.0-63.2 dB, ≤0.001), an acceleration of developing a significant ARHL at least by two decades (PTA0.5-4kHz 33.4 dB at 50-59yr vs. 28.2 dB at 30-39yr, ≤0.001), and an increased loss of word recognition scores (total average 84.7% vs. 80.0%, ≤0.001). Significant noise-associated growth in the prevalence of tinnitus also was shown, including more than a triple prevalence for constant tinnitus (28.10% vs. 8.85%, ≤0.001) and near to a double prevalence for intermittent tinnitus (19.10% vs. 11.10%, ≤0.001). Noise also resulted in the elevation of the static compliance of the tympanic membrane throughout age (total average 0.61 vs. 0.85 mmho, ≤0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings emphasize the significant contribution of CNE in auditory aging and the precipitation of both ARHL and tinnitus.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOtology & NeurotologySame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207