SynthesisBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology
Otoprotective effect of the use of antioxidants on noise exposure in experimental studies with rodents - A systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology. 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.
- Functional and biochemical protection by combined N-acetylcysteine and D-methionine in guinea pig noise-induced hearing loss.Head & face medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the occurrence of otoprotective effect of the use of antioxidants on noise exposure in experimental models with rodents through a systematic review.
methodsAn electronic search was conducted in EMBASE, LILACS, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science databases, and in the grey literature of articles published up to June 2022. In the PICO strategy, the studied population consisted of rodent animals exposed to high levels of sound pressure, the intervention consisted of the use of antioxidants, the comparison with the concomitant use of placebo and the results of audiological tests such as Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions and Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potential and the results of histological and immunohistochemical evaluations were collected as outcomes. The analysis of the numerical data was performed according to the Review Manager (Cochrane), using the mean difference as a measure of effect.
results35 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis and 27 in the quantitative synthesis. The analysis carried out by CAMARADES indicates that most of the included studies demonstrate methodological quality, and the SYRCLE RoB risk of bias assessment protocol revealed a high risk of bias in all eligible studies. In the analysis of the meta-analysis, the effect generated by the use of antioxidants was notorious in comparison with groups that were exposed to the same noise, without the use of antioxidant. Using the ABR responses at the most commonly used frequencies of 2,000-32,000 Hz as outcomes, it was possible to observe in all analyses an otoprotective effect caused by the use of the antioxidant.
conclusionThis systematic review with meta-analysis demonstrated the variable otoprotective effect of the use of antioxidants on exposure to sound pressure levels in experimental studies with rodents, despite the high risk of bias and great heterogeneity of the selected studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1:
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.