ArticleBMJ open2019
Relationships between dipstick proteinuria and risk of hearing impairment among Japanese workers: a prospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesHearing impairment is among the most significant health problems, and the number of adults with hearing impairment is increasing worldwide. Therefore, the prevention of hearing impairment is important. Proteinuria appears to be a risk factor for hearing impairment, but no prospective studies have examined the association between proteinuria and hearing impairment risk. This prospective study aimed to clarify the association between dipstick proteinuria and risk of hearing impairment.
designThis was a prospective cohort study based on annual health check-up data, 2008-2016.
settingData were collected on 7005 employees of a single company who worked in offices and factories throughout Japan.
participantsWe analysed data from 5699 subjects (88.6% men) who underwent annual health check-ups twice or more from 2008 to 2016, had no missing data, and were free from hearing impairment at baseline. We regarded the first health check-up as the baseline examination. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Hearing tests were performed using audiometry at two frequencies (1 and 4 kHz) during the health check-ups. Defining total moderate hearing impairment as the inability to respond to 30 dB at 1 kHz and/or 40 dB at 4 kHz, we examined the association between dipstick proteinuria at baseline and risk of hearing impairment at final examination.
resultsTotal moderate hearing impairment was noted in 162 (2.8%) subjects. Compared with subjects without proteinuria at baseline, the multivariable adjusted OR (95% CI) was 5.35 (1.87-15.25) for subjects with proteinuria ≥2+, 0.92 (0.40-2.13) for those with proteinuria +/-, and 1.33 (0.63-2.80) for those with proteinuria+ at baseline.
conclusionsSevere dipstick proteinuria was positively associated with risk of hearing impairment in the future. Our results suggest that medical examinations including urine testing are effective for detecting subjects with high risk of hearing impairment.
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.