Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34040061›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

A psychoacoustic test for misophonia assessment.

Falco Enzler, Céline Loriot, Philippe Fournier, Arnaud J Noreña

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06333925 (Using Neurostimulation to Accelerate Change in Misophonia), which is not on this map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06333925 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Using Neurostimulation to Accelerate Change in Misophonia: a Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorDuke UniversityRan2024 to 2026Enrolled59ConditionsMisophonia, Emotion Dysregulation, Sensory Processing Disorder, Auditory Over ResponsivityArmsHigh Frequency Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (HF rTMS), Sham Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (sham- rTMS), Cognitive Restructuring
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Misophonia: A Systematic Review of Current and Future Trends in This Emerging Clinical Field.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Did Kant suffer from misophonia?Frontiers in psychology · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Commentary: Consensus definition of misophonia.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022
    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

4 authors.

Falco EnzlerCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Aix-Marseille University, Laboratory of Cognitive Neurosciences , 3 Place Victor Hugo, 13003, Marseille, France.
Céline LoriotUniversity of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Philippe FournierCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Aix-Marseille University, Laboratory of Cognitive Neurosciences , 3 Place Victor Hugo, 13003, Marseille, France.
Arnaud J NoreñaCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Aix-Marseille University, Laboratory of Cognitive Neurosciences , 3 Place Victor Hugo, 13003, Marseille, France. arnaud.norena@univ-amu.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Misophonia is a condition where a strong arousal response is triggered when hearing specific human generated sounds, like chewing, and/or repetitive tapping noises, like pen clicking. It is diagnosed with clinical interviews and questionnaires since no psychoacoustic tools exist to assess its presence. The present study was aimed at developing and testing a new assessment tool for misophonia. The method was inspired by an approach we have recently developed for hyperacusis. It consisted of presenting subjects (n = 253) with misophonic, pleasant, and unpleasant sounds in an online experiment. The task was to rate them on a pleasant to unpleasant visual analog scale. Subjects were labeled as misophonics (n = 78) or controls (n = 55) by using self-report questions and a misophonia questionnaire, the MisoQuest. There was a significant difference between controls and misophonics in the median global rating of misophonic sounds. On the other hand, median global rating of unpleasant, and pleasant sounds did not differ significantly. We selected a subset of the misophonic sounds to form the core discriminant sounds of misophonia (CDS

Indexed as

AdultAffective SymptomsArousalEmotionsFemaleHumansHyperacusisMalePsychoacousticsSelf ReportSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID34040061
PMCPMC8155015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.