ReviewOtology & neurotology open2025
A Systematic Review of Psychometric Validation for Subjective Tinnitus Outcome Measures Assessing Acute Treatment Effects.
Review in Otology & neurotology open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mandibular Movement During Swallowing in Patients with Tinnitus: An Instrumented Case-Control Study.Audiology research · 2026Article
- Pathophysiological Insights and Multimodal Interventions in Chronic Tinnitus, Anxiety, and Sleep Disorders.Nature and science of sleep · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Purpose: Tinnitus treatments are often scientifically evaluated using self-report questionnaires as primary outcome measures. However, guidelines for the appropriate application of these tools in research study designs are limited. This study aims to determine if any tinnitus outcome measure is validated for use in determining symptom change in response to treatments administered with hyperacute follow-up (less than 5 days). Databases Reviewed: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Methods: A literature review was conducted of peer-reviewed articles on the psychometric properties of tinnitus outcome measures. A total of 594 articles were identified with 7 articles included for final review. Psychometric data, including the minimum clinically important difference and the time from intervention to outcome measurement (data collection interval), were extracted. Results: The final review included 5 studies on the Tinnitus Functional Index and 2 on the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory. The time intervals for intervention follow-up were defined as: 0-1 days = immediate, 2-5 days = hyperacute, 6-10 days = acute, 11-31 days = subacute, and >31 days = chronic. Two studies utilized chronic time intervals and 4 studies had follow-up in the subacute interval. The final study reported a wide follow-up range from hyperacute to subacute. No studies evaluated psychometrics with an immediate interval. Conclusion: There is no psychometrically validated tinnitus outcome measure for immediate treatment intervals and little evidence for hyperacute or acute intervals. Further research into the validity of tinnitus measurement tools in various time frames is required for the guidance of future study design.
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.