Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34698077›Full record

ArticleAudiology research2021

Item Response Theory Investigation of Misophonia Auditory Triggers.

Silia Vitoratou, Nora Uglik-Marucha, Chloe Hayes, Mercede Erfanian, Oliver Pearson, Jane Gregory

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Audiology research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  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. Sensory Processing, Dissociation, and Affective Symptoms in Misophonia: A Cross-Sectional Study of 35 Adults.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Silia VitoratouPsychometrics and Measurement Lab, Biostatistics and Health Informatics Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AB, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1209-8167
Nora Uglik-MaruchaPsychometrics and Measurement Lab, Biostatistics and Health Informatics Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AB, UK.
Chloe HayesPsychometrics and Measurement Lab, Biostatistics and Health Informatics Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AB, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8528-8167
Mercede ErfanianUCL Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett, University College London, London WC1H 0NN, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9253-4162
Oliver PearsonPsychometrics and Measurement Lab, Biostatistics and Health Informatics Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AB, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1149-9284
Jane GregoryCentre for Anxiety Disorders and Trauma, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London SE5 8AZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8379-6643
King's College London · GBSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 102176/B/13/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Misophonia is characterised by a low tolerance for day-to-day sounds, causing intense negative affect. This study conducts an in-depth investigation of 35 misophonia triggers. A sample of 613 individuals who identify as experiencing misophonia and 202 individuals from the general population completed self-report measures. Using contemporary psychometric methods, we studied the triggers in terms of internal consistency, stability in time, precision, severity, discrimination ability, and information. Three dimensions of sensitivity were identified, namely, to eating sounds, to nose/throat sounds, and to general environmental sounds. The most informative and discriminative triggers belonged to the eating sounds. Participants identifying with having misophonia had also significantly increased odds to endorse eating sounds as auditory triggers than others. This study highlights the central role of eating sounds in this phenomenon and finds that different triggers are endorsed by those with more severe sound sensitivities than those with low sensitivity.

Indexed as

item response theorymisophoniapsychometricsS-Fivesound sensitivity

Identifiers

PMID34698077
PMCPMC8544191
OpenAlexW3206728459

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.