| Title |
Prevalence of otologic signs and symptoms in adult patients with temporomandibular disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Oral Investigations, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00784-016-1926-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isabela Porto De Toledo, Fabiane Miron Stefani, André Luís Porporatti, Luis André Mezzomo, Marco A. Peres, Carlos Flores-Mir, Graziela De Luca Canto |
| Abstract |
This study aims to estimate the prevalence of otologic signs and symptoms in adult patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Search strategies were developed for each of the following databases: PubMed, LILACS, Scopus, Web of Science, Proquest, LIVIVO, and Google Scholar and OpenGrey was used to assess the grey literature. It was included in this review only observational studies using either research diagnostic criteria (RDC)/TMD or DC/TMD indexes were selected. The Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data from the Joanna Briggs Institute was used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. A proportion random effects meta-analysis was conducted within the eight included studies. Eight studies met the eligibility criteria and were selected. All of the included studies used the RDC/TMD and report associated otologic signs and symptoms. The studies were clustered into groups based on prevalence for each individual sign or symptom. The most prevalent otologic symptom associated with TMD was ear fullness (74.8 % standard deviation (SD), 43.02 to 96.25 %; n = 50), followed by otalgia (55.1 % SD, 31.78 to 77.30; n = 386), tinnitus (52.1 % SD, 38.43 to 65.74; n = 1293), vertigo (40.8 % SD, 11.29 to 74.72; n = 374), and hearing loss (38.9 % SD, 2.83 to 85.46; n = 744). The prevalence of otologic signs and symptoms in adult patients with TMD is high. The most prevalent otologic symptom in patient adults with TMD is ear fullness. This study intends to provide understanding over the prevalence of otologic signs and symptoms in TMD cases in adults. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 135 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 10% |
| Researcher | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 18% |
| Unknown | 42 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Unknown | 47 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 October 2022.
All research outputs
#5,853,338
of 23,479,361 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Oral Investigations
#227
of 1,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,132
of 360,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Oral Investigations
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,479,361 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,470 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,142 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.