ArticleAmerican journal of industrial medicine2021
Prevalence of hearing protection device non-use among noise-exposed US workers in 2007 and 2014.
Article in American journal of industrial medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Hearing protection field attenuation estimation systems and associated training for reducing workers' exposure to noise.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Repurposing Renin-Angiotensin System Drugs for the Treatment of Audiovestibular Disorders.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Worsened multitasking performance with simulated hearing protection correlates with individuals' choice not to "wear" it.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Impacts of listening practice on work performance while wearing hearing protection.Discover public health · 2026Article
- Association between hearing protection device use and noise-induced hearing loss among manufacturing workers in China: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Is Work-Related Hearing Loss Associated With Dementia? Evidence From a High-Risk Population.American journal of industrial medicine · 2025Article
- Hazardous exposures and engineering controls in the landscaping services industry.Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene · 2025Article
- Prevalence of hearing loss among noise-exposed U.S. workers within the Construction sector, 2010-2019.Journal of safety research · 2025Article
- Impacts of noise-induced hearing loss on sleep, health, and workplace: Multi-group analysis.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Preventing Occupational Hearing Loss: 50 Years of Research and Recommendations from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Workers' Compensation Costs for Occupational Hearing Loss Claims in the United States, 2009-2013.Seminars in hearing · 2023Review
- Design and testing of a personalized noise monitoring system.Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene · 2023Article
- Targeted therapeutic hypothermia protects against noise induced hearing loss.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- The middle ear muscle reflex: Current and future role in assessing noise-induced cochlear damage.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2023Article
- Noise Levels and Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in the Orthopaedic Operating Room: A Systematic Review.JB & JS open accessReview
- Article
- Hearing Loss and Serum Lipid Profile Differences among Healthcare Versus Automotive Industry Workers: Cross-Sectional Study.Noise & healthArticle
- An Exploratory Study on Self-Reported Auditory Symptoms and Hearing Loss among Workers in a Small-Scale LPG Plant.Indian journal of occupational and environmental medicineArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study estimated the prevalence of hearing protection device (HPD) non-use among US workers exposed to hazardous workplace noise and provided risk estimates.
methodsSelf-reported data from the National Health Interview Survey in 2007 (15,852 workers) and 2014 (23,656 workers) were examined. Weighted prevalence and adjusted prevalence ratios of HPD non-use (using HPDs half the time or less when exposed to hazardous noise) were estimated by demographic, industry, and occupation. Differences in the prevalences of non-use were estimated and compared.
resultsThe prevalence of HPD non-use was 53% among all noise-exposed workers in 2014. Workers in the Accommodation and Food Services industry had the highest prevalence (90%) and risk (PR: 2.47, 95% confidence interval: 1.54-3.96) of HPD non-use. The industries with the lowest prevalences of noise exposure, including Finance and Insurance (2%) and Health Care and Social Assistance (4%), had some of the highest prevalences of HPD non-use (80% and 83%, respectively). There were no statistically significant changes in HPD non-use among industries between 2007 and 2014. Among occupations, HPD non-use increased 37% in Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports and Media, and decreased 39% in Architecture and Engineering.
conclusionThe prevalence of HPD non-use remains high; especially within industries and occupations with fewer noise-exposed workers. These groups need targeted attention to increase awareness and compliance. Employers should require HPD use and trainings among noise-exposed workers and provide an assortment of HPDs tailored to noise level and type, workplace environment, communication and audibility needs, and individual comfort and convenience.
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.