Associations between hyperacusis and psychosocial work factors in the general population

Paulin, Johan; Nyback, Maj-Helen; Nordin, Steven

doi:10.1007/s00420-018-1356-x

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Meanwhile, Halevi-Katz (37) further classified responses into five grades: never, seldom, sometimes, often, or always. There were 8 other studies that were diagnosed by asking questions (4,6,7,19,23,25,34,37). Only two studies used the same questions for diagnosis (4,6).…”

Section: Diagnosis and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There were 8 other studies that were diagnosed by asking questions (4,6,7,19,23,25,34,37). Only two studies used the same questions for diagnosis (4,6). The discomfort thresholds (LDL, UCL, intolerance sound level, etc) had been measured in 9 studies (2, 9, 20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 33), of which 6 used lowered discomfort loudness as the diagnostic criteria (2,9,15,20,22,28).…”

Section: Diagnosis and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three studies were focused on 17 ± 1 to 79-year-old people. The respective prevalence in these studies was 8.6% (19), 11.1% (39), and 5.5% (6). Two of these studies (6,39), which were conducted within a 2-year interval, used the same questionnaire.…”

Section: Agementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The respective prevalence in these studies was 8.6% (19), 11.1% (39), and 5.5% (6). Two of these studies (6,39), which were conducted within a 2-year interval, used the same questionnaire. Hyperacusis patients in two studies all gave the affirmative response to the question: "Do you have a hard time tolerating everyday sounds that you believe most other people can tolerate?"…”

Section: Agementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Prevalence of Hyperacusis in the General and Special Populations: A Scoping Review

Ren

Xiang

et al. 2021

Front. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To study the prevalence of hyperacusis in the general population and the special population, and to determine the effect of population differences on hyperacusis.Methods: The two authors followed a scoping review methodology and screened nearly 30 years of English literature in Pubmed, Web of Science, OVID, and EBSCO. Then, the extracted results of each study were discussed in groups and subgroups.Results: The authors selected 42 pieces of scientific literature that met the requirements, studying a total of 34,796 subjects, including the general population (28,425 subjects), the special occupation population (2,746 subjects), and the patients with concomitant diseases (5,093 subjects). The prevalence was 0.2–17.2% in the general population, 3.8–67% in the special occupation population, and 4.7–95% in the patients with special diseases. It was found that in the general population, the high prevalence occurs in adolescents and older adults. The prevalence of hyperacusis in women is significantly higher than in men. In people with hearing disorders, the prevalence of hyperacusis is significantly higher than in people with normal hearing. Various diseases (such as Williams syndrome, tinnitus, and autism), as well as various occupations (musicians, music students, teachers, and others), have been found to be high risk factors for hyperacusis.Conclusion: The high prevalence of hyperacusis and the large differences between reported prevalence in different studies deserves our great attention. Additionally, in order to increase the comparability of the studies, a standardized set of criteria are needed to study the prevalence of hyperacusis.

show abstract

Section: Diagnosis and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Diagnosis and Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Agementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Agementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Prevalence of Hyperacusis in the General and Special Populations: A Scoping Review

Ren

Xiang

et al. 2021

Front. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This would suggest that the majority of recently published research in hyperacusis has not necessarily been addressing the areas of concern. A search of Google Scholar revealed that the most recent publications for hyperacusis have focused on basic research questions around causes of hyperacusis,32–34 or on research investigating hyperacusis and the workplace 35. The only relevant ongoing trial is investigating ‘Exposure Therapy for Auditory Sensitivity in Autism’ (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03206996).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying and prioritising unanswered research questions for people with hyperacusis: James Lind Alliance Hyperacusis Priority Setting Partnership

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo determine research priorities in hyperacusis that key stakeholders agree are the most important.Design/settingA priority setting partnership using two international surveys, and a UK prioritisation workshop, adhering to the six-staged methodology outlined by the James Lind Alliance.ParticipantsPeople with lived experience of hyperacusis, parents/carers, family and friends, educational professionals and healthcare professionals who support and/or treat adults and children who experience hyperacusis, including but not limited to surgeons, audiologists, psychologists and hearing therapists.MethodsThe priority setting partnership was conducted from August 2017 to July 2018. An international identification survey asked respondents to submit any questions/uncertainties about hyperacusis. Uncertainties were categorised, refined and rephrased into representative indicative questions using thematic analysis techniques. These questions were verified as ‘unanswered’ through searches of current evidence. A second international survey asked respondents to vote for their top 10 priority questions. A shortlist of questions that represented votes from all stakeholder groups was prioritised into a top 10 at the final prioritisation workshop (UK).ResultsIn the identification survey, 312 respondents submitted 2730 uncertainties. Of those uncertainties, 593 were removed as out of scope, and the remaining were refined into 85 indicative questions. None of the indicative questions had already been answered in research. The second survey collected votes from 327 respondents, which resulted in a shortlist of 28 representative questions for the final workshop. Consensus was reached on the top 10 priorities for future research, including identifying causes and underlying mechanisms, effective management and training for healthcare professionals.ConclusionsThese priorities were identified and shaped by people with lived experience, parents/carers and healthcare professionals, and as such are an essential resource for directing future research in hyperacusis. Researchers and funders should focus on addressing these priorities.

show abstract

Investigation of the relationship between hyperacusis and auditory processing difficulties in individuals with normal hearing

Cogen,

Cetin Kara,

Kara

et al. 2023

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Associations between hyperacusis and psychosocial work factors in the general population

Abstract: The results suggest that worrying about aspects at work, perceiving low social support, and not perceiving being rewarded at work are associated with hyperacusis.

Cited by 9 publications

References 41 publications

Prevalence of Hyperacusis in the General and Special Populations: A Scoping Review

Prevalence of Hyperacusis in the General and Special Populations: A Scoping Review

Identifying and prioritising unanswered research questions for people with hyperacusis: James Lind Alliance Hyperacusis Priority Setting Partnership

Investigation of the relationship between hyperacusis and auditory processing difficulties in individuals with normal hearing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About