ArticleJournal of audiology & otology2026
Audiological Outcomes in Cervical Spine Pathologies.
Article in Journal of audiology & otology, 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
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe objective of this study was to evaluate the potential effects of loss of cervical lordosis (LCL) and cervical disc pathologies (CDPs) on the auditory system and to identify the predominant anatomical sites of these effects using both objective and subjective audiological assessments. Subjects and.
methodsThis prospective controlled study included 98 individuals: 57 patients diagnosed with CDP via cervical spinal magnetic resonance imaging and 41 individuals without such a diagnosis. Of the participants, 68 (69.4%) were female, and 30 (30.6%) were male. CDP was assessed based on the presence and level of bulging or protrusion. Cervical lateral radiographs revealed LCL in 65 patients, while 33 showed no such loss. The mean age of participants was 41.0±6.9 years (range: 21-52 years). All participants underwent audiological evaluation, including assessment of hearing thresholds and the presence of tinnitus.
resultsThe mean speech frequency and high-frequency hearing thresholds, measured by pure-tone audiometry, were significantly higher in the 57 patients with CDP than in the 41 control participants (p=0.04 and p=0.02, respectively). However, no statistically significant differences were observed in speech frequencies, high-frequency hearing thresholds, and otoacoustic emission measurements, as assessed by pure-tone audiometry, between the 65 patients with LCL and the 33 control participants without LCL (p=0.22, p=0.18, p=0.51, respectively). Upon evaluating the groups for the presence and severity of tinnitus, no differences in LCL or CDP were observed (p=0.81 and p=0.95, respectively).
conclusionsOur findings indicate that patients with CDPs exhibit elevated hearing thresholds. Given the limited number of studies addressing inner ear function in common conditions such as cervical disc herniation and LCL, this study contributes to the literature by emphasizing the importance of auditory assessments in these patients.
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.