ArticleFrontiers in neurology2017
Clinical Validation of a New Tinnitus Assessment Technology.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving Audiology Student Training by Clinical Simulation of Tinnitus: A Glimpse of the Lived Experience of Tinnitus.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Emerging Topics in the Behavioral Neuroscience of Tinnitus.Current topics in behavioral neurosciences · 2021Article
- Individual Reliability of the Standard Clinical Method vs Patient-Centered Tinnitus Likeness Rating for Assessment of Tinnitus Pitch and Loudness Matching.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2018Article
- Does Tinnitus Depend on Time-of-Day? An Ecological Momentary Assessment Study with the "TrackYourTinnitus" Application.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2017Article
- Comparing Three Established Methods for Tinnitus Pitch Matching With Respect to Reliability, Matching Duration, and Subjective Satisfaction.Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current clinical assessment of tinnitus relies mainly on self-report. Psychoacoustic assessment of tinnitus pitch and loudness are recommended but methods yield variable results. Herein, we investigated the proposition that a previously validated fixed laboratory-based method (Touchscreen) and a newly developed clinically relevant portable prototype (Stand-alone) yield comparable results in the assessment of psychoacoustic tinnitus pitch and loudness. Participants with tinnitus [
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.