Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23571304›Full record

Trial reportNoise & health

Rationale for the tinnitus retraining therapy trial.

Craig Formby, Roberta Scherer, TRTT Study Group

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Noise & health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01177137 (Tinnitus Retraining Therapy Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01177137 phase3completednot on this map

Tinnitus Retraining Therapy Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthRan2011 to 2017Enrolled151ConditionsSubjective TinnitusArmsConventional sound generator (SG), Placebo sound generator (placebo SG), Standard of Care (SC), Directive Counseling (DC)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Craig FormbyDepartment of Communicative Disorders, The University of Alabama, Box 870242, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487, USA. cformby@as.wa.edu
Roberta Scherer
TRTT Study Group
Johns Hopkins University · USUniversity of Alabama · US

Funding

Tinnitus Retraining Therapy Trial (TRTT)U01DC007411 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA IN TUSCALOOSA · PI FORMBY, CHARLES CRAIG · 2009 to 2017
$3.7M
Tinnitus Retraining Therapy TrialU01DC007422 · NIDCD · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SCHERER, ROBERTA W · 2009 to 2017
$2.6M
NIDCD NIH HHS U01 DC007411NIDCD NIH HHS U01 DC007422
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Tinnitus Retraining Therapy Trial (TRTT) is a National Institutes of Health-sponsored, multi-centered, placebo-controlled, randomized trial evaluating the efficacy of tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT) and its component parts, directive counseling and sound therapy, as treatments for subjective debilitating tinnitus in the military. The TRTT will enroll 228 individuals at an allocation ratio of 1:1:1 to: (1) directive counseling and sound therapy using conventional sound generators; (2) directive counseling and placebo sound generators; or (3) standard of care as administered in the military. Study centers include a Study Chair's Office, a Data Coordinating Center, and six Military Clinical Centers with treatment and data collection standardized across all clinics. The primary outcome is change in Tinnitus Questionnaire (TQ) score assessed longitudinally at 3, 6, 12, and 18-month follow-up visits. Secondary outcomes include: Change in TQ sub-scales, Tinnitus Handicap Inventory, Tinnitus Functional Index, and TRT interview visual analog scale; audiometric and psychoacoustic measures; and change in quality of life. The TRTT will evaluate TRT efficacy by comparing TRT (directive counseling and conventional sound generators) with standard of care; directive counseling by comparing directive counseling plus placebo sound generators versus standard of care; and sound therapy by comparing conventional versus placebo sound generators. We hypothesize that full TRT will be more efficacious than standard of care, directive counseling and placebo sound generators more efficacious than standard of care, and conventional more efficacious than placebo sound generators in habituating the tinnitus awareness, annoyance, and impact on the study participant's life.

Indexed as

Habituation, PsychophysiologicPerceptual MaskingAcoustic StimulationDirective CounselingHumansLongitudinal StudiesSeverity of Illness IndexSurveys and QuestionnairesTinnitusTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID23571304
PMCPMC3763750
OpenAlexW2076274759

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.