ArticleJAMA network open2021
Analysis of Early Biomarkers Associated With Noise-Induced Hearing Loss Among Shipyard Workers.
Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adolescent Hearing Loss in China and the United States: Trends, Socioeconomic Disparities, and Noise Exposure From GBD 1990-2023 and NHANES 2005-2020.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- Prediction of risk of hearing loss by industry noise from cross-sectional and longitudinal data.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Optimizing a Classification Model to Evaluate Individual Susceptibility in Noise-Induced Hearing Loss: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Relationship between hypertension/blood pressure and hearing sensitivity among drivers: A correlation analysis.Journal of education and health promotion · 2023Article
- Treatment with the Ferroptosis Inhibitor Ferrostatin-1 Attenuates Noise-Induced Hearing Loss by Suppressing Ferroptosis and Apoptosis.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2022Article
- Bottom-Up and Top-Down Attention Impairment Induced by Long-Term Exposure to Noise in the Absence of Threshold Shifts.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Characteristics of sound localization in children with unilateral microtia and atresia and predictors of localization improvement when using a bone conduction device.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Article
- Advancing Occupational Noise-Induced Hearing Loss Risk Assessment in the Era of Large-Scale Data.Noise & healthReview
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: It is important to determine what frequencies and auditory perceptual measures are the most sensitive early indicators of noise-induced hearing impairment. Objectives: To examine whether hearing loss among shipyard workers increases more rapidly at extended high frequencies than at clinical frequencies and whether subtle auditory processing deficits are present in those with extensive noise exposure but little or no hearing loss. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study collected audiometric data (0.25-16 kHz), survey questionnaires, and noise exposure levels from 7890 shipyard workers in a Shanghai shipyard from 2015 to 2019. Worsening hearing loss was evaluated in the group with hearing loss. Speech processing and temporal processing were evaluated in 610 participants with noise exposure and clinically normal hearing to identify early biomarkers of noise-induced hearing impairment. Data analysis was conducted from November to December 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Linear regression was performed to model the increase in hearing loss as function of cumulative noise exposure and compared with a group who were monitored longitudinally for 4 years. Auditory processing tests included speech-in-noise tests, competing sentence tests, dichotic listening tests, and gap detection threshold tests and were compared with a control group without history of noise exposure. Results: Of the 5539 participants (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age, 41.0 [34.0-47.0] years; 3861 [86.6%] men) included in the cross-sectional analysis, 4459 (80.5%) were hearing loss positive and 1080 (19.5%) were hearing loss negative. In younger participants (ie, ≤40 years), the maximum rate of increase in hearing loss was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.39-0.42) dB per A-weighted dB-year (dB/dBA-year) at 12.5 kHz, higher than the growth rates of 0.36 (95% CI, 0.35-0.36) dB/dBA-year at 4 kHz, 0.32 (95% CI, 0.31-0.33) dB/dBA-year at 10 kHz, 0.31 (95% CI, 0.30-0.31) dB/dBA-year at 6 kHz, 0.27 (95% CI, 0.26-0.27) dB/dBA-year at 3 kHz, and 0.27 (95% CI, 0.27-0.28) dB/dBA-year at 8 kHz. In the 4-year longitudinal analysis of hearing loss among 403 participants, the mean (SD) annual deterioration in hearing was 2.70 (2.98) dB/y at 12.5 kHz, almost twice as that observed at lower frequencies (eg, at 3kHz: 1.18 [2.15] dB/y). The auditory processing scores of participants with clinically normal hearing and a history of noise exposure were significantly lower than those of control participants (eg, median [IQR] score on speech-in-noise test, noise-exposed group 1 vs control group: 0.63 [0.55-0.66] vs 0.78 [0.76-0.80]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the increase in hearing loss among shipyard workers was more rapid at 12.5 kHz than at other frequencies; workers with clinically normal hearing but high cumulative noise exposure are likely to exhibit deficits in speech and temporal processing.
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.