This review aimed to systematically review what has been published regarding tinnitus during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic up to March 2021 by performing both narrative and quantitative meta-analyses. Of the 181 records identified, 33 met the inclusion criteria, which generally had a fair risk of overall bias. In the included, 28 studies focused on the impact of the COVID-19 virus on tinnitus and 5 studies focused on the impact of the pandemic on tinnitus. From the studies identifying the impact of COVID-19 on tinnitus, there were 17 cross-sectional studies (n = 8913) and 11 case series or case report studies (n = 35). There were 2 cross-sectional studies (n = 3232) and 3 pre-post-test design studies (n = 326) focusing on the impact of the pandemic on tinnitus. No consistent patterns were found regarding the presentation of the tinnitus or additional factors that could have tinnitus developing in the disease impact studies. For the pandemic impact studies, the associated stress and anxiety of the pandemic were consistently suggested to contribute to tinnitus experiences. The pooled estimated prevalence of tinnitus post COVID-19 was 8% (CI: 5 to 13%). Medical professionals should be aware that tinnitus might be more problematic following the pandemic or after having COVID-19.

Although the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the use of a Community‐Based Rehabilitation (CBR) model, little is known about how CBR has been applied in the hearing healthcare setting. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify and describe studies on Community‐Based Hearing Rehabilitation (CBHR) programs within the applied context. The review was conducted in September 2020 with updated searches in November 2021 according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and reported using the guidelines and checklist for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses‐Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA‐ScR). Fifty‐nine peer‐reviewed research articles were included in the review. A narrative synthesis was conducted to map out the types of CBHR programs. Studies were classified into audiological themes: awareness, screening and assessment of hearing in newborn/infants, children and adults, training of community health workers, rehabilitation, cost‐effectiveness and describing the service delivery models. Further categorisation was made based on CBR aspect matrices for each study. Most of the studies come from high‐income countries in North America and Europe. CBHR studies predominantly focused on creating awareness, training and hearing screenings and/or assessments in communities and evaluating effectiveness in providing knowledge and access to hearing health services in rural or underserved communities. Further work is needed to examine the outcomes and effectiveness of CBHR using controlled studies. Moreover, more work is needed in low‐ and middle‐income countries where the application of CBHR is critical for increased access and affordability.