ArticleJournal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR2018
Pilot Study of Audiometric Patterns in Fuchs Corneal Dystrophy.
Article in Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- TCF4-mediated Fuchs endothelial corneal dystrophy: Insights into a common trinucleotide repeat-associated disease.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Although Fuchs corneal dystrophy (FCD) is considered an eye disease, a small number of studies have identified genes related to both FCD and hearing loss. Whether FCD is related to hearing loss is unknown. Method: This is a case-control study comparing pure-tone audiometry hearing thresholds in 180 patients with FCD from a hospital-based ophthalmology clinic with 2,575 population-based controls from a nationally representative survey, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (from cycles 2005-06 and 2009-10). Generalized estimating equations were used to compare mean better-hearing ear thresholds in the 2 groups adjusted for age, sex, race, and noise exposure. Results: Patients with FCD had higher hearing thresholds (worse hearing) in lower frequencies (mean difference at 0.5 kHz = 3.49 dB HL) and lower hearing thresholds (better hearing) in higher frequencies (difference at 4 kHz = -4.25 dB HL) compared with population-based controls. Conclusion: In the first study to use objectively measured hearing, FCD was associated with poorer low-frequency and better high-frequency audiometric thresholds than population controls. Further studies are needed to characterize this relationship.
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.