Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32706700›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

Worldwide Prevalence of Hearing Loss Among Smartphone Users: Cross-Sectional Study Using a Mobile-Based App.

Marcin Masalski, Krzysztof Morawski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Reliability of an Android Based Free Application for Assessment of Hearing Loss in Adults.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Hearing loss and the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC research notes · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marcin MasalskiDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-8086-1465
Krzysztof MorawskiDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1727-2542
Wroclaw Medical University · PLWrocław University of Science and Technology · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn addition to the aging process, risk factors for hearing loss in adults include, among others, exposure to noise, use of ototoxic drugs, genetics, and limited access to medical care. Differences in exposure to these factors are bound to be reflected in the prevalence of hearing loss. Assessment of hearing loss can easily be carried out on a large scale and at low cost using mobile apps.

objectiveThis study aimed to conduct a worldwide assessment of the differences in hearing loss prevalence between countries in a group of mobile device users.

methodsHearing tests were conducted using the open-access Android-based mobile app Hearing Test. The app is available free of charge in the Google Play store, provided that consent to the use of the results for scientific purposes is given. This study included hearing tests carried out on device models supported by the app with bundled headphones in the set. Calibration factors for supported models were determined using the biological method. The tests consisted of self-determining the quietest audible tone in the frequency range from 250 Hz to 8 kHz by adjusting its intensity using the buttons. The ambient noise level was optionally monitored using a built-in microphone. Following the test, the user could compare his hearing threshold against age norms by providing his or her age. The user's location was identified based on the phone's IP address.

resultsFrom November 23, 2016 to November 22, 2019, 733,716 hearing tests were conducted on 236,716 mobile devices across 212 countries. After rejecting the tests that were incomplete, performed with disconnected headphones, not meeting the time criterion, repeated by the same user, or carried out regularly on one device, 116,733 of 733,716 tests (15.9%) were qualified for further analysis. The prevalence of hearing loss, defined as the average threshold at frequencies 0.5 kHz, 1 kHz, 2 kHz, and 4 kHz above 25 dB HL in the better ear, was calculated at 15.6% (95% CI 15.4-15.8). Statistically significant differences were found between countries (P<.001), with the highest prevalences for Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India (>28%) and the lowest prevalences for Taiwan, Finland, and South Korea (<11%).

conclusionsHearing thresholds measured by means of mobile devices were congruent with the literature data on worldwide hearing loss prevalence. Uniform recruitment criteria simplify the comparison of the hearing loss prevalence across countries. Hearing testing on mobile devices may be a valid tool in epidemiological studies carried out on a large scale.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHearing LossHumansMaleMiddle AgedMobile ApplicationsPrevalenceSmartphoneYoung Adultepidemiologyhearing losshearing testmobile-basedpure-tone audiometry

Identifiers

PMID32706700
PMCPMC7413293
OpenAlexW3045091404

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.