ArticleHNO2026
[Supplementary use of broadband absorbance measurements for classification of normal hearing].
Article in HNO, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe definition of normal hearing according to the DIN standard refers to the air conduction threshold of tympanometry. However, middle ear function is not specifically considered in this definition. The present study aimed to prospectively collect audiometric data for normal hearing that are based not only on tone audiometry but also supplemented by objective data on middle ear function.
methodsThe examinations were carried out in 84 ears of test subjects aged 18-25 years with normal hearing according to tone audiometry. Objective middle ear diagnostics were performed using classic tympanometry, broadband absorbance tympanometry, and stapedius reflex threshold measurement. A distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurement was also carried out.
resultsCompliance of more than 2 mmho was found in 7 of the 84 ears examined, which are considered separately in the following. The resonance frequency of these 7 ears was below the first quartile of the comparison group (759 Hz), and the absorbance of this group was above the third quartile of the absorbance of the group with regular compliance for frequencies up to 750 Hz. In the group with increased compliance, in more cases than in the comparison group (14% vs. 5%) were no DPOAEs detectable at at least one frequency. In 6 of the 7 ears with increased compliance, stapedius reflex thresholds were found within the whisker range of the group with regular compliance at all measured frequencies.
conclusionIn the DIN standard for classification of normal hearing, the definition of normal hearing is based solely on tone audiometric parameterization. The reference values measured in this study with regard to compliance of the eardrum show clear inter-individual variance. Supplementing the assessment of middle ear function, such as by measuring compliance, resonance frequency, and/or absorbance curves, could provide additional information to confirm normal hearing.
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.