ArticlePloS one2024
Clinical characteristics of the "Gap" between the prevalence and incidence of hearing loss using National Health Insurance Service data.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hearing screening outcomes and otoscopic findings among primary school children in Southwest Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2026Article
- The association of dietary inflammatory index with auditory and vestibular disorders in Korean adults: Differential links to peripheral vertigo, hearing loss and tinnitus.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- AI-Based Prediction of Bone Conduction Thresholds Using Air Conduction Audiometry Data.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
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
objectivesHearing loss is the inability to hear speech or sounds well, owing to a number of causes. This study aimed to simultaneously determine the prevalence, incidence, and the Gap between them in hearing loss in South Korean patients at the same point in time as well as to identify patients who have not recovered from hearing loss.
methodsWe examined the prevalence and incidence of patients diagnosed with hearing loss in the National Health Insurance Service database over an 11-year period from 2010 to 2020. The difference between the prevalence and the incidence was defined in this study as the term "Gap". Gap is the number of patients converted into the number of patients per 100,000 people by subtracting the incidence from the prevalence. Clinical characteristics such as sex and age per 100,000 individuals were examined.
resultsAs of 2020, the domestic prevalence obtained in this study was 1.84%, increasing annually, and the prevalence increased with age to 4.10% among those over 60. The domestic incidence was 1.57%, increasing annually, and the incidence increased with age to 3.36% for those over 60s. The Gap was 0.27%, showing a steady increase from 2011 to 2020 with a corresponding increase in insurance benefit expenses.
conclusionTo fully understand the burden of hearing loss and develop effective prevention and treatment strategies, it is important to measure the Gap between its prevalence and incidence. This Gap means a lot because hearing loss is an irreversible disease. Gap represents patients who have already been diagnosed with hearing loss and are being diagnosed every year, indicating that the number of patients who do not recover is increasing. In other words, the increase in Gap meant that there were many patients who constantly visited the hospital for diagnosis of hearing loss.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.