ArticleSafety and health at work2017
Individual Fit Testing of Hearing Protection Devices Based on Microphone in Real Ear.
Article in Safety and health at work, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hearing protection field attenuation estimation systems and associated training for reducing workers' exposure to noise.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- The effect of hearing protection devices on speech intelligibility of Persian employees.BMC research notes · 2020Trial
- A Tester to Evaluate the Correct Placement of Earplugs.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- A deep neural-network classifier for photograph-based estimation of hearing protection attenuation and fit.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021Article
- Effectiveness of a Novel Index System in Preventing Early Hearing Loss among Furniture Industry Skills Training Students in Malaysia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Selection of Earmuffs and Other Personal Protective Equipment Used in Combination.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLabeled noise reduction (NR) data presented by manufacturers are considered one of the main challenging issues for occupational experts in employing hearing protection devices (HPDs). This study aimed to determine the actual NR data of typical HPDs using the objective fit testing method with a microphone in real ear (MIRE) method.
methodsFive available commercially earmuff protectors were investigated in 30 workers exposed to reference noise source according to the standard method, ISO 11904-1. Personal attenuation rating (PAR) of the earmuffs was measured based on the MIRE method using a noise dosimeter (SVANTEK, model SV 102).
resultsThe results showed that means of PAR of the earmuffs are from 49% to 86% of the nominal NR rating. The PAR values of earmuffs when a typical eyewear was worn differed statistically (
conclusionThis study could provide local individual fit data. Ergonomic aspects of the earmuffs and different levels of users experience and awareness can be considered the main factors affecting individual fitting compared with the laboratory condition for acquiring the labeled NR data. Based on the obtained fit testing results, the field application of MIRE can be employed for complementary studies in real workstations while workers perform their regular work duties.
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.