ArticleInternational journal of audiology2020
Prevalence of hearing loss among noise-exposed workers within the services sector, 2006-2015.
Article in International journal of audiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of Occupational Factors Contributing to Variability in Noise-induced Hearing Loss Severity.Noise & healthPooled it
- Noise-induced hearing loss and blood factors: results from a comprehensive cross-sectional study in Iran.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Risk of noise-induced hearing loss in the spine surgeon.North American Spine Society journal · 2024Article
- Preventing Occupational Hearing Loss: 50 Years of Research and Recommendations from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Hearing Loss and Serum Lipid Profile Differences among Healthcare Versus Automotive Industry Workers: Cross-Sectional Study.Noise & healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study is to estimate the prevalence of hearing loss among noise-exposed U.S. workers within the Services sector.
methodsAudiograms for 1.9 million workers (158,436 within Services) from 2006 to 2015 were examined. Prevalence and adjusted risk for hearing loss as compared with a reference industry were estimated for the Services sector/sub-sectors, and all industries combined.
resultsThe prevalence of hearing loss within Services was 17 compared to 16% for all industries combined. However, many sub-sectors greatly exceeded the overall prevalence (10-33% higher) and/or had adjusted risks significantly higher than the reference industry. Workers in Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Rural Development had the highest prevalence (50%), and workers in Solid Waste Combustors and Incinerators had more than double the risk, the highest of any sub-sector. Some sub-sectors traditionally viewed as 'low-risk' also had high prevalences and risks.
conclusionsLarge numbers of workers within Services have an elevated risk of hearing loss and need immediate hearing conservation efforts. Additional research and surveillance are needed for sub-sectors for which there is low awareness of hearing hazards or a lack of hearing data.
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.