Trial reportThe Laryngoscope2026
NAD+ Enhanced on Hearing Recovery in Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in The Laryngoscope, 2026. 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.
- NAD+ Enhanced on Hearing Recovery in Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: Randomized Controlled Trial.The Laryngoscope · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe optimal treatment and timing for sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) remain debated. This study aimed to determine if the hearing improvement and recovery time were better in the NAD+ group as compared to the control group.
methodsThere was a randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial conducted between June 2022 and June 2024. SSNHL patients were randomly divided into two groups: the NAD+ group (NAD+ plus standard treatment, n = 18) and the control group (standard treatment, n = 20). The primary outcomes were PTA improvement, recovery rate per Siegel's criteria, and average recovery time, measured from baseline to 3-month follow-ups.
resultsThe study with 38 participants (average age 41.74 years, 78.98% male, 42.11% right ear, average Pre-PTA 76.88 dB HL) showed that the NAD+ group experienced significantly greater hearing improvement (40.21 dB HL) compared to the control group (23.06 dB HL, t = 2.722, p = 0.010). The effective rate was higher in the NAD+ group (94.44% vs. 60.00%, Z = -3.014, p = 0.003). Significant group × time interactions were noted in the NAD+ group (F = 2.867, p = 0.030), with greater improvements from 7 days to 3 months post-treatment. Recovery time was shorter in the NAD+ group (62.97 vs. 175.98 days, p = 0.028). Tinnitus and aural fullness improved more in the NAD+ group, especially after 3 months. Higher pre-treatment tinnitus and aural fullness scores were linked to better outcomes with NAD+ for SSNHL.
conclusionsNAD+ was more effective in improving hearing and reducing recovery time in SSNHL patients and also benefited tinnitus and aural fullness management. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2:
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.