ArticleBMJ open2016
Noise-induced hearing loss in a longitudinal study of Norwegian railway workers.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic and Environmental Factors Shaping Hearing Loss: Xenobiotics, Mechanisms and Translational Perspectives.Journal of xenobiotics · 2026Review
- Assessment of Semicircular Canal Functioning Using a Video Head Impulse Test in Individuals with Occupational Noise Exposure.Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2025Article
- Kremen1 regulates the regenerative capacity of support cells and mechanosensory hair cells in the zebrafish lateral line.iScience · 2024Article
- Occupational Noise-Induced Hearing Loss among Migrant Workers in Kuwait.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Noise-induced hearing loss and its prevention: Integration of data from animal models and human clinical trials.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019Review
- Work-Related Noise Exposure in a Cohort of Patients with Chronic Tinnitus: Analysis of Demographic and Audiological Characteristics.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to analyse longitudinal data to assess the risk of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) in Norwegian railway workers.
designLongitudinal.
settingA major Norwegian railway company.
methodsWe examined data from the first and last audiograms for the period 1991-2014, from 9640 railway workers with varying occupational noise exposure and with an average observation period of 10 years. The course of hearing acuity in seven groups of railway workers (train drivers, conductors, bus drivers, traffic controllers, train maintenance workers, track maintenance workers and others) were compared with each other and with ISO standards (ISO 1999).
resultsThe change in hearing threshold during the observation period was 2-3 dB in the 0.5-4 kHz range and 6-7 dB in the 3-6 kHz range adjusted for age and sex, for all occupational groups, which is slightly less than expected (8 dB) according to ISO 1999.
conclusionsThe risk of NIHL in Norwegian railway workers during the period 1991-2014 has been negligible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.