↓ Skip to main content

Analysis of Audiometric Differences of Patients with and without Tinnitus in a Large Clinical Database

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, February 2017
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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.
Title
Analysis of Audiometric Differences of Patients with and without Tinnitus in a Large Clinical Database
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2017.00031
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominik Gollnast, Konstantin Tziridis, Patrick Krauss, Achim Schilling, Ulrich Hoppe, Holger Schulze

Abstract

Human hearing loss (HL) and comorbidities like tinnitus pose serious problems for people's daily life, which in most severe cases may lead to social isolation, depression, and suicide. Here, we investigate the relationship between hearing deficits and tinnitus. To this end, we conducted a retrospective study on anonymized pure tone and speech audiometric data from patients of the ENT hospital Erlangen in which we compare audiometric data between patients with and without tinnitus. Overall data from 37,661 patients with sensorineural (SHL) or conductive HL (CHL) with (T, 9.5%) or without (NT, 90.5%) a tinnitus percept in different age groups and with different tinnitus pitches were included in this study. The results of the pure tone audiometry comparisons showed significant differences in T patients compared to NT patients. In young patients, we generally found lower hearing thresholds in T compared to NT patients. In adult patients, differences were more heterogeneous: hearing thresholds in T patients were lower in low frequency ranges, while they were higher at high frequencies. Furthermore, lower thresholds were more often found in CHL patients and could rarely be detected in SHL patients. In speech audiometry, only CHL patients with high-pitched tinnitus showed lower thresholds compared to NT patients' thresholds. The results of this study may point to a biologically plausible functional benefit on hearing thresholds in HL tinnitus patients. We hypothesize that the physiological mechanism of stochastic resonance counteracts HL by adding neuronal noise to the system. This neuronal noise may induce changes in the auditory pathway and finally-as a side effect of threshold improvement-lead to the development of a tinnitus percept. We propose a general model of changed hearing thresholds in T patients, being either decreased or increased compared to NT patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Master 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 15 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 12%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 17 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 18 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,826,875
of 25,187,238 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#721
of 14,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,250
of 431,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#6
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,187,238 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 431,581 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 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 95% of its contemporaries.