2020
DOI: 10.1080/14992027.2020.1733677
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A process for prioritising systematic reviews in tinnitus

Abstract: Objective: To develop an innovative prioritisation process to identify topics for new or updated systematic reviews of tinnitus research. Design:A two stage prioritisation process was devised. Firstly, a scoping review assessed the amount of randomised-controlled-trial-level evidence available. This enabled development of selection criteria for future reviews, aided the design of template protocol, and suggested the scale of work that would be required to conduct these reviews. Secondly, using the predefined p… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, a lack of reviews of existing knowledge was indicated as an impediment to progress in tinnitus research. For example, a need for further Cochrane reviews for specific tinnitus interventions has recently been proposed (Sereda et al, 2020), since reviews for some commonly prescribed interventions are missing or are almost a decade old (Baldo et al, 2012). Additionally, systematic reviews would significantly contribute to selecting among the different available methods for assessing an individual with tinnitus and inform decisions for standardizing tinnitus assessment (Shabbir et al, 2021).…”
Section: Future Research Directionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, a lack of reviews of existing knowledge was indicated as an impediment to progress in tinnitus research. For example, a need for further Cochrane reviews for specific tinnitus interventions has recently been proposed (Sereda et al, 2020), since reviews for some commonly prescribed interventions are missing or are almost a decade old (Baldo et al, 2012). Additionally, systematic reviews would significantly contribute to selecting among the different available methods for assessing an individual with tinnitus and inform decisions for standardizing tinnitus assessment (Shabbir et al, 2021).…”
Section: Future Research Directionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The median (IQR) tinnitus duration was 5 (2-10) years. The median (range) THI at baseline was 44 (30-60), and the THI subscales, functional, emotional and catastrophic, were 16 (12-26), 16 (12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26) and 12 (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14), respectively. Baseline demographic characteristics and THI are listed in Table 1, The location of tinnitus (right, left or both ears), THI subscales, THI grade and the remaining baseline demographic characteristics are listed in eTable 2 in Supplement.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 It is believed to improve cochlear blood flow 8 and neural function, 9 diminishing the effects of cochlear disfunction and central auditory hyperactivity. This is encouraged by promising scientific results (32.8% of clinical improvement vs. 17.0% untreated) 10,11 ; safety (similar to the placebo) 3 ; and accessibility even in emerging countries (e.g., 1 month of treatment cost about 5.0% of the Brazilian minimal wage). However, in a recent systematic review by Wegner et al, 3 only five clinical trials were selected, all of which were compromised by methodologic flaws.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The hyperlipidemia of tinnitus patients should be treated, as these researchers noted. There is no gold standard in the treatment of tinnitus [ 19 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%