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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Pitch and Loudness Tinnitus in Individuals with Presbycusis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1055/s-0035-1570311 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bruna Macangnin Seimetz, Adriane Ribeiro Teixeira, Leticia Petersen Schmidt Rosito, Leticia Sousa Flores, Carlos Henrique Pappen, Celso Dall'igna |
| Abstract |
Introduction Tinnitus is a symptom that is often associated with presbycusis. Objective This study aims to analyze the existence of association among hearing thresholds, pitch, and loudness of tinnitus in individuals with presbycusis, considering the gender variable. Methods Cross-sectional, descriptive, and prospective study, whose sample consisted of individuals with tinnitus and diagnosis of presbycusis. For the evaluation, we performed anamnesis along with otoscopy, pure tone audiometry, and acuphenometry to analyze the psychoacoustic characteristics of tinnitus individuals. Results The sample consisted of 49 subjects, with a mean age of 69.57 ± 6.53 years, who presented unilateral and bilateral tinnitus, therefore, a sample of 80 ears. In analyzing the results, as for acuphenometry, the loudness of tinnitus was more present at 0dB and the pitch was 6HKz and 8HKz. Regarding the analysis of the association between the frequency of greater hearing threshold and tinnitus pitch, no statistical significance (p = 0.862) was found. As for the association between the intensity of greater hearing threshold and tinnitus loudness, no statistical significance (p = 0.115) was found. Conclusion There is no significant association between the hearing loss of patients with presbycusis and the pitch and loudness of tinnitus. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 23% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 13% |
| Engineering | 5 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 4% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 15 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. 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 24 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,121,801
of 24,135,931 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#4
of 661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,930
of 405,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology
#1
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,135,931 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 661 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 405,713 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 99% of its contemporaries.