ArticleNoise & health
Extended High-Frequency Audiometry in Early Detection of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Occupational Settings.
Article in Noise & health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is allergic rhinitis associated with hidden hearing loss in pediatric/adolescent patients? A cross-sectional study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Article
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
objectiveThis study investigated the effect of noise exposure on extended high-frequency audiometry (EHFA) thresholds in an occupational setting. This study aimed to determine whether EHFA can provide insights into early cochlear changes that are undetectable through conventional methods and whether EHFA is more pronounced among workers exposed to higher noise levels.
methodsA retrospective, quantitative design was employed to analyze audiometric data from 180 employees across categories of three occupational noise exposure (<85, 85-104, and ≥105 dBA, A-weighted). Participants underwent conventional and EHFA, with thresholds measured from 500 to 20,000 Hz. Stratified random sampling was used to select individuals with normal thresholds at 500 to 4000 Hz (<25 dB HL). Multivariate analysis of variance and logistic regression were used to evaluate the effects of noise exposure, age, and years of service on EHFA thresholds.
resultsThe conventional audiometry thresholds were found between -10 and 50 dB HL, and the EHFA range was between -10 and 100 dB HL. The hearing threshold patterns were similar across the noise categories. No significant differences were observed in conventional audiometry and EHFA based on noise exposure categories (P = 0.511) or years of service (P = 0.745). However, significant associations with age were identified at 6000 Hz, 8000 Hz, and across all EHFA thresholds (P < 0.05).
conclusionEHFA demonstrated limited sensitivity in differentiating noise-induced hearing loss across noise exposure categories, potentially reflecting the effectiveness of the hearing conservation program implemented. Age emerged as a significant factor influencing thresholds at high frequencies, highlighting the importance of considering age in EHFA.
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.