ArticleSafety and health at work2024
Time Trend of Occupational Noise-induced Hearing Loss in a Metallurgical Plant With a Hearing Conservation Program.
Article in Safety and health at work, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to analyze the trend of occupational noise-induced hearing loss (ONIHL) in Brazilian workers at a metallurgical plant with a hearing conservation program (HCP), which has been addressed in a previous study. Methods: All 152 workers in this time series (20032018) participated in the HCP and used personal protective equipment. All annual audiometry records in the company's software were collected from the electronic database. The trend of ONIHL was analyzed with the joinpoint regression model. The hearing thresholds of ONIHL cases at the end of the series were compared with those found in a national reference study. Results: The binaural mean hearing thresholds at 3, 4, and 6 kHz at the end of the series were higher for ages ≥50 years, exposures ≥85 dB (A), time since admission >20 years, and maintenance workers. Significance was found only in the group divided by age. There was an increasing time trend of ONIHL, though with a low percentage variation for the period (AAPC = 3.5%; Conclusion: Despite the unmet expectation of a stationary trend in the study period, the time pace of ONIHL evolution did not follow what was expected for a population exposed to noise. These findings signal to the scientific community and public authorities that good ONIHL control is possible when HCP is well implemented.
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.