ArticleTrends in hearing
One Size Does Not Fit All: Developing Common Standards for Outcomes in Early-Phase Clinical Trials of Sound-, Psychology-, and Pharmacology-Based Interventions for Chronic Subjective Tinnitus in Adults.
Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pattern of Tinnitus and Its Risk Factors Among Individuals with Tinnitus in South India.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025Article
- REM Sleep Impairment May Underlie Sleep-Driven Modulations of Tinnitus in Sleep Intermittent Tinnitus Subjects: A Controlled Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Observational
- Comparing Clustering Methods Applied to Tinnitus within a Bootstrapped and Diagnostic-Driven Semi-Supervised Framework.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Comparison between two self-guided tinnitus pitch matching methods.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- Use of open-ended questionnaires to examine the effects of tinnitus and its relation to patient-reported outcome measures.International journal of audiology · 2022Article
- Assessment of Subjective Tinnitus Treatment Results Using a Prototype Device for Electrical and Magnetic Stimulation of the Ear-Preliminary Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Daily Contributors of Tinnitus Loudness and Distress: An Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Recovering Hidden Responder Groups in Individuals Receiving Neurofeedback for Tinnitus.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Hearing Aid Fitting in Tinnitus: A Scoping Review of Methodological Aspects and Effect on Tinnitus Distress and Perception.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Methodological Aspects of Randomized Controlled Trials for Tinnitus: A Systematic Review and How a Decision Support System Could Overcome Barriers.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- What Tinnitus Therapy Outcome Measures Are Important for Patients?- A Discrete Choice Experiment.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Multidisciplinary Tinnitus Research: Challenges and Future Directions From the Perspective of Early Stage Researchers.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2021Review
- Article
- Defining Symptom Concepts in Chronic Subjective Tinnitus: Web-Based Discussion Forum Study.Interactive journal of medical research · 2020Article
- Protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled stand-alone feasibility trial to assess potential effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of digital hearing aids in patients with tinnitus and hearing loss (the HUSH trial).Pilot and feasibility studies · 2020Article
- A study on the epidemiology of tinnitus in the United Kingdom.Clinical epidemiology · 2019Article
- Why Is There No Cure for Tinnitus?Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
- When Parallel Roads Meet: Orchestrating Collaborations Between Regulatory, Ethical, and Business Partners in Translational Medicine.Frontiers in medicine · 2019Article
- Article
- 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
8 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Good practice in clinical trials advocates common standards for assessing and reporting condition-specific complaints ("outcome domains"). For tinnitus, there is no common standard. The Core Outcome Measures in Tinnitus International Delphi (COMiT'ID) study created recommendations that are relevant to the most common intervention approaches for chronic subjective tinnitus in adults using consensus methods. Here, the objectives were to examine why it is important to tailor outcome domain selection to the tinnitus intervention that is being evaluated in the clinical trial and to demonstrate that the COMiT'ID recommendations are robust. The COMiT'ID study used an online three-round Delphi method with three separate surveys for sound-, psychology-, and pharmacology-based interventions. Survey data were analyzed to assess quality and confidence in the consensus achieved across surveys and stakeholder groups and between survey rounds. Results found participants were highly discriminatory in their decision-making. Of the 34 outcome domains reaching the prespecified consensus definition in the final round, 17 (50%) were unique to one intervention, while only 12 (35%) were common to all three. Robustness was demonstrated by an acceptable level of agreement across and within stakeholder groups, across survey rounds, across medical specialties (for the health-care practitioners), and across health-care users with varying tinnitus duration. There were few dissenting voices, and results showed no attrition bias. In conclusion, there is compelling evidence that one set of outcomes does not fit all therapeutic aims. Our analyses evidence robust decisions by the electronic Delphi process, leading to recommendations for three unique intervention-specific outcome domain sets. This provides an important starting point for standardization.
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.