ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
The Annoying Nature of Snoring Sounds Is Not Only about Intensity: A Pilot Study on Exposed Test Subjects.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Noise Annoyance as a Determinant of Physiological Changes Linked to Disease Promotion.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Pooled it
- Accuracy of Smartphone-Mediated Snore Detection in a Simulated Real-World Setting: Algorithm Development and Validation.JMIR formative research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to assess (i) which acoustic characteristics of snoring sounds are associated with the annoying nature of snoring sounds; (ii) whether listeners' heart rates correlate with their perceived annoyance; and (iii) whether perceived annoyance is different between listeners with different experiences with their bedpartners' snoring sounds. Six snoring epochs with distinct acoustic characteristics (viz., reference, high pitch, high intensity, short interval, irregular intensity, and irregular intervals) were collected from snoring patients. Twenty physicians and technicians were involved in the healthcare of snoring patients, and were divided into three groups based on personal experience with their bedpartners' snoring sounds (viz., non-snoring, snoring but not annoying, and snoring and annoying). The test subjects listened to each epoch and rated its level of annoyance. Listeners' heart rates were also recorded during the test using a finger plethysmograph. Within the limitations of this study, it was found that, compared with other snoring sounds, snoring sounds with high intensity and irregularity were associated with higher perceived annoyance. However, higher perceived annoyance of snoring sound was not reflected in heart rate-related parameters. In addition, listeners' personal experiences do not seem to affect their perceived annoyance.
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.