SynthesisCoDAS2025
Auditory function and brainstem responses in allergic rhinitis: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in CoDAS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeTo investigate differences in auditory thresholds and brainstem evoked response audiometry (BERA) between individuals with and without allergic rhinitis (AR). RESEARCH STRATEGIES: Searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Open Access Theses and Dissertations on April 2, 2024. The study protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XUTSN). SELECTION CRITERIA: Observational studies comparing auditory outcomes between individuals with and without AR were included. DATA ANALYSIS: The Joanna Briggs Institute checklist was used to assess bias. The primary outcome was the mean difference (MD) in auditory thresholds (250Hz to 8000Hz) measured by audiometry. Secondary outcomes included latencies of waves and interpeak intervals. The meta-analysis was conducted using the inverse variance method under a random effects model.
resultsFive studies with 432 participants were included. Meta-analysis revealed higher auditory thresholds in patients with AR at 4000Hz (MD = 7.83 dB; 95% CI: 2.46 to 13.19; p = 0.004) and 8000Hz (MD = 8.66 dB; 95% CI: 2.70 to 14.62; p = 0.004). No differences were observed for frequencies <4000Hz or in BERA outcomes.
conclusionThis meta-analysis identified significantly higher auditory thresholds at 4000Hz and 8000Hz in individuals with AR, suggesting a potential peripheral auditory effect. No consistent differences were found in BERA parameters. These findings suggest that AR may impact high-frequency hearing without affecting neural conduction at the brainstem level.
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.