ArticleHeliyon2024
Developing and validating a risk assessment method for noise-induced hearing loss in workers.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Various risk factors can affect noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) among employees. This research sought to establish and validate a risk assessment method for NIHL using these risk factors. This cross-sectional research was carried out with 220 workers from a steel manufacturing facility. At first, their demographic characteristics and information related to the studies' items were gathered by the researcher-made questionnaire. In the next step, the noise exposure values of the participants were measured by the sound pressure level meter based on the ISO 9612 standard. Moreover, a pure tone audiometric test of bone and air conduction was used to measure hearing loss in people. Ultimately, a new index for risk assessment was created. Indirect effect coefficients of individual factors such as work experience, age, smoking, and effective diseases were 0.266, 0.227, 0.056, and 0.064, respectively. The coefficients of noise exposure items including occupational noise and leisure noise were obtained as 0.687 and 0.660. The personal protective equipment (PPE) items including use of PPE, noise reduction rating of PPE, and awareness of PPE were 0.194, 0.147, and 0.127, respectively. These coefficients were utilized to create a new index. The overall score of the index was divided into four categories using optimal cut-off values of 4.85, 6.84, and 7.59. According to the findings, the OHLRA methods were able to account for 74 percent of the hearing loss values. The results showed that the novel index for risk assessment had proper validity in the prediction of NIHL.
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.