ArticleNoise & health
Sex bias in basic and preclinical noise-induced hearing loss research.
Article in Noise & health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Persistent impairment of spatial hearing and neural binaural interaction after "temporary" noise-induced hearing loss.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Sex differences in response to kanamycin-induced ototoxicity in C57BL/6 J mice.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Association between the number of pregnancies and hearing loss: NHANES 1999-2018.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Transcriptional-profile changes in the medial geniculate body after noise-induced tinnitus.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Hair Growth Effect of DN106212 in C57BL/6 Mouse and Its Network Pharmacological Mechanism of Action.Current issues in molecular biology · 2023Article
- Speech-in-noise testing: Innovative applications for pediatric patients, underrepresented populations, fitness for duty, clinical trials, and remote services.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022Review
- Beneficial effects of time-restricted feeding on gentamicin cytotoxicity in mouse cochlea and vestibular organs.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2022Article
- Role of microRNA‑375‑3p‑mediated regulation in tinnitus development.International journal of molecular medicine · 2021Article
- Integrated stress response inhibition provides sex-dependent protection against noise-induced cochlear synaptopathy.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Sex-based Differences in Hearing Loss: Perspectives From Non-clinical Research to Clinical Outcomess.Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2020Review
- Auditory function and dysfunction: estrogen makes a difference.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2020Review
- Novel QUEST MRI In Vivo Measurement of Noise-induced Oxidative Stress in the Cochlea.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Sex differences in hearing: Probing the role of estrogen signaling.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019Article
- Sex bias in rhinology research.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2018Article
- Sex bias in basic and preclinical age-related hearing loss research.Biology of sex differences · 2018Review
- The impact of biological sex on the response to noise and otoprotective therapies against acoustic injury in mice.Biology of sex differences · 2018Article
- Electron microscopy demonstrating noise exposure alters synaptic vesicle size in the inferior colliculus of cat.Noise & healthArticle
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSex differences in brain biochemistry, physiology, structure, and function have been gaining increasing attention in the scientific community. Males and females can have different responses to medications, diseases, and environmental variables. A small number of the approximately 7500 studies of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) have identified sex differences, but the mechanisms and characterization of these differences have not been thoroughly studied. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) issued a mandate in 2015 to include sex as a biological variable in all NIH-funded research beginning in January 2016. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn the present study, the representation of sex as a biological variable in preclinical and basic studies of NIHL was quantified for a 5-year period from January 2011 to December 2015 prior to the implementation of the NIH mandate.
resultsThe analysis of 210 basic and preclinical studies showed that when sex is specified, experiments are predominantly performed on male animals. DISCUSSION: This bias is present in studies completed in the United States and foreign institutions, and the proportion of studies using only male participants has actually increased over the 5-year period examined.
conclusionThese results underscore the need to invest resources in studying NIHL in both sexes to better understand how sex shapes the outcomes and to optimize treatment and prevention strategies.
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.