ArticleDiving and hyperbaric medicine2019
Longitudinal screening of hearing threshold in navy divers: is diving really a hazard?
Article in Diving and hyperbaric medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Subclinical auditory effects of recreational diving: a multidimensional audiological assessment beyond the audiogram.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Longitudinal Evaluation of Hearing Function in Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy Inside Attendants.The journal of international advanced otology · 2025Article
- Routine Chest X-Rays Are Inaccurate in Detecting Relevant Intrapulmonary Anomalies During Medical Assessments of Fitness to Dive.Frontiers in physiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHearing loss (HL) is common in the adult working population. It is widely assumed that diving is a risk factor for HL. However, studies with sufficient follow-up comparing HL in divers to non-divers are limited. This study aimed to assess the hearing threshold (HT) of Royal Netherlands Navy divers who had been diving for more than 15 years and to compare it to the ISO standard 7029:2017 reference table.
methodsIn this 25-year retrospective cohort study the Royal Netherlands Navy Diving Medical Centre audited the medical records of 1,117 Navy divers. Yearly dive medical assessments were performed according to professional standards, including audiometry. HTs were compared to the ISO 7029:2017 reference table, including Z-distribution, using paired t-tests.
resultsThirty-five divers were included who had been diving for 15 years or longer. The HT increased significantly in nine of the 16 measured frequencies, while the Z-score decreased significantly in nine of the 16 tested frequencies (eight in both ears). In the 25-year follow-up the pattern was more obvious, with one significantly increased HT, and 10 significantly decreased Z-scores. DISCUSSION: The absolute HT increases after 15 years of military diving, but less than would be expected from normal age-related deterioration. Moreover, when comparing Z-scores, this sample of divers actually hear better than non-divers. We conclude that military diving is not an increased risk for HL compared to regular occupational hazards and suggest withdrawing the requirement for routine yearly audiometric evaluation as part of a dive medical examination.
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.