↓ Skip to main content

Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare Two Methods of Tinnitus Intervention to Two Control Conditions

Overview of attention for article published in Ear and hearing (Print), November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor
guideline
2 clinical guideline sources

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare Two Methods of Tinnitus Intervention to Two Control Conditions
Published in
Ear and hearing (Print), November 2016
DOI 10.1097/aud.0000000000000330
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In this four-site clinical trial, we evaluated whether tinnitus masking (TM) and tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT) decreased tinnitus severity more than the two control groups: an attention-control group that received tinnitus educational counseling (and hearing aids if needed; TED), and a 6-month-wait-list control (WLC) group. The authors hypothesized that, over the first 6 months of treatment, TM and TRT would decrease tinnitus severity in Veterans relative to TED and WLC, and that TED would decrease tinnitus severity relative to WLC. The authors also hypothesized that, over 18 months of treatment, TM and TRT would decrease tinnitus severity relative to TED. Treatment effectiveness was hypothesized not to be different across the four sites. Across four Veterans affairs medical center sites, N = 148 qualifying Veterans who experienced sufficiently bothersome tinnitus were randomized into one of the four groups. The 115 Veterans assigned to TM (n = 42), TRT (n = 34), and TED (n = 39) were considered immediate-treatment subjects; they received comparable time and attention from audiologists. The 33 Veterans assigned to WLC were, after 6 months, randomized to receive delayed treatment in TM, TRT, or TED. Assessment of outcomes took place using the tinnitus handicap inventory (THI) at 0, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months. Results of a repeated measures analysis of variance using an intention-to-treat approach showed that the tinnitus severity of Veterans receiving TM, TRT, and TED significantly decreased (p < 0.05) relative to Veterans in the WLC group at 3 months (effect sizes = 0.44, 0.52, and 0.27, respectively) and at 6 months (effect sizes = 0.52, 0.56, and 0.40, respectively). Analyses comparing effectiveness of TM, TRT, and TED over 18 months revealed that the three conditions were not significantly different, but that tinnitus severity in the combined groups significantly decreased (p < 0.01) from baseline to 3 months (5.6 THI points) and from 3 to 6 months (3.7 THI points). With respect to clinically significant change, about half of Veterans who received TM (55%), TRT (59%), or TED (46%) showed strong or modest improvement on the THI by 18 months. Without treatment, the WLC group did not show significant change. Treatment effectiveness did not differ by study site. Audiologists who provided interventions to Veterans with bothersome tinnitus in the regular clinic setting were able to significantly reduce tinnitus severity over 18 months using TM, TRT, and TED approaches. These results suggest that TM, TRT, and TED, when implemented as in this trial, will provide effectiveness that is relatively similar by 6 months and beyond.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Researcher 7 10%
Other 4 6%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 20 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 16%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Psychology 4 6%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 21 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 01 May 2025.
All research outputs
#3,472,235
of 34,457,357 outputs
Outputs from Ear and hearing (Print)
#159
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,289
of 338,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ear and hearing (Print)
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,457,357 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 338,155 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.