ArticleIranian journal of public health2022
Time to Noise-Induced Hearing Loss among Different Type of Shift Work among Steel Workers: A Survival Study.
Article in Iranian journal of public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Occupational hearing loss and job stress among industrial workers in Markazi Province Iran using structural equation modeling.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Single-Cell Sequencing Reveals Circadian Sensitivity of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss Mediated by Macrophage-Driven NLRP3 Inflammasome Activation.Neuroscience bulletin · 2026Article
- Working behaviors and the risk of sensorineural hearing loss: A large cohort study.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There have been few reports on relationships between Shift Work (SW) and time to Noise-Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL). This research explores the relation between SW and time to NIHL among male workers. Methods: Between 1990 and 2015, this historical cohort study was conducted. Two different definitions events (Low Frequency Hearing (LFH) and High Frequency Hearing (HFH)) of NIHL An average pure-tone hearing threshold was thresholds at 1, 1.5 and 2 kHz for LFH(un-normal>20) and 4, 6 and 8 kHz for HFH (un-normal>20) for Air (AC) and Bone (BC) conduction, in both ears, respectively. In this study Kaplan-Meier and Multilevel Cox Model in addition R version 3.2.1 and MLWiN software used to analysis data. Results: There were 6632 male workers in the research survey (mean age=35(±5)). Among these subjects, 2678 (40%),278 (4%) and 3676 (56%) were Day Workers (DW), Weekly Rotating Shift workers (WRS) and Routinely Rotating Shift workers (RRS), respectively. The result of this study showed more hazard risk of ear problem in LFH (Hazard=1.55 with 95% CI= (1.06-1.39)) and HFH (Hazard=1.08 with 95% CI= (1.04-1.13)) in RRS rather than day workers. In WRS group ear problem has been seen just in LFH (Hazard=1.55 with 95% CI= (1.2-2.0)). Conclusion: The findings of the 15-year historical cohort study generally support a relationship between SW and time to NIHL. Therefore, more actions in the field of noise control, greater use of safety devices as well as increased staff training on the use of safety devices recommended for shift worker.
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.