Cited by 212Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsHearing Loss and RehabilitationNoise Effects and Management

Cognitive behavioural therapy for tinnitus

Open access
Fuller, Thomas, Cima, Rilana, Langguth, Berthold, Mazurek, Birgit, Vlaeyen, Johan WS, Hoare, Derek J·2020·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

CBT versus audiological care (tinnitus education and rehabilitation for hearing loss), Outcome 3 Depression at end of treatment..........................

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd012614.pub2

Cites

198 of 198 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is low certainty to support the use of cognitive behavioral therapy for depression and anxiety in people with tinnitus due to the methodological quality of evidence.

    “there is low certainty to support its use for depression and anxiety in people with tinnitus due to the methodological quality of evidence (Fuller et al., 2020).”

    From A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Exploring Effects of Third-Wave Psychological Therapies on Hearing-Related Distress, Depression, Anxiety, and Quality of Life in People With Audiological Problems. (2022) · cites this paper as Fuller et al., 2020

    The Authors’ conclusions (page unavailable) report a possible small benefit for depression, with uncertainty due to concerns about evidence quality. They describe evidence for improving anxiety as limited, and the Implications for practice say there is insufficient evidence to recommend tinnitus-focused CBT when improving anxiety is the primary aim. The claim therefore overstates support for its use for anxiety and treats the certainty for both outcomes as uniformly low. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Compared to audiological care and tinnitus retraining therapy, CBT is more effective in improving quality of life.

    “Compared to audiological care and tinnitus retraining therapy, CBT is more effective in improving quality of life.”

    From Research trends and hotspots of cognitive behavioral therapy for tinnitus: a bibliometric analysis (2025) · cites this paper as Fuller et al., 2020

    The ‘CBT versus audiological care’ section reports that CBT probably reduces tinnitus’s impact on quality of life compared with audiological care. The ‘CBT versus tinnitus retraining therapy’ section reports a possible benefit, but it is based on one study with low-certainty evidence; the Discussion says there is insufficient evidence to conclude that CBT is superior to TRT. The claim states that comparison more definitively than the source supports. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • CBT is the first-line evidence-based psychotherapy for tinnitus and aims to modify dysfunctional beliefs and behaviours to reduce annoyance and distress.

    “CBT is the first-line evidence-based psychotherapy for tinnitus, and it aims to modify dysfunctional beliefs and behaviours in order to reduce the annoyance and distress associated with tinnitus.7”

    From SoundMind Trial: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial for online acceptance and commitment therapy and sound therapy for tinnitus (2024) · cites this paper as [7]

    The Description of the intervention says CBT addresses dysfunctional thoughts and behavioural responses to reduce tinnitus’s impact on quality of life. The Authors’ conclusions report evidence of benefit and note that clinical guidelines endorse CBT for chronic bothersome tinnitus, but the passages do not establish that it is the first-line psychotherapy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • There is a lack of reliable and consistent evidence on the efficacy of individual and combination tinnitus treatments.

    “There is a lack of reliable and consistent evidence on the efficacy of the individual and combination treatments, such as audiological care and psychological treatment.”

    From Combining the unequal variance signal detection model with the health belief model to optimize shared decision making in tinnitus patients: part 2—patient profiling (2025) · cites this paper as Fuller et al., 2020

    The Completeness section (page unavailable) says there were too few studies comparing CBT with audiological care or tinnitus retraining therapy to reach a conclusion, and that evidence for comparisons with other active interventions was of low certainty. But it also reports moderate-certainty evidence that CBT is superior to wait-list control at the end of treatment. The review therefore supports uncertainty about some comparisons, not a general lack of reliable evidence for all individual and combination tinnitus treatments. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The lack of reliable and consistent evidence on tinnitus treatment efficacy is due to different study designs and lack of reproducible results.

    “This is due to different study designs and lack of reproducible results (Fuller et al., 2020; Hoare et al., 2014; Sereda et al., 2018).”

    From Combining the unequal variance signal detection model with the health belief model to optimize shared decision making in tinnitus patients: part 2—patient profiling (2025) · cites this paper as Fuller et al., 2020

    The Quality of the evidence section (page unavailable) says that inconsistency between results lowered certainty for some CBT comparisons, and Assessment of heterogeneity (page unavailable) considers differences in study design. The paper does not establish that different designs and a lack of reproducible results explain unreliable evidence for tinnitus treatments generally; its findings concern CBT specifically. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 201 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Konzag TA, Rubler D, Bloching M, Bandemer-Greulich U, Fikentscher E, Frommer J. Counselling versus a self-help manual for tinnitus outpatients: a comparison of effectiveness. HNO 2006;54(8):599-604.
  2. Kröner-Herwig 1999 {published data only} Kroener-Herwig B, Esser G, Frenzel A, Fritsche G, Schilkowsky G. Result of an outpatient cognitive-behavioral group treatment for chronic tinnitus. Proceedings of the Sixth International Tinnitus Seminar, Cambridge, UK, 5-9 September, 1999. 1999:369-72.
  3. Tan 2018 {published data only} Tan Y, Chen L, Luo Z, Ye W. The therapeutic effect of rehabilitation exercise and cognitive-behavioral intervention on the patients with tinnitus. Modern Clinical Nursing 2018;17(2):34-9.
  4. Hallam RS. Manual of the Tinnitus Questionnaire (TQ). Revised and updated. London: Polpresa Press, 2008.
  5. Hoare 2011b Hoare DJ, Kowalkowski V, Kang S, Hall DA. Systematic review and meta-analyses of RCTs examining tinnitus management. Laryngoscope 2011;121:1555-64.
  6. Jacobson E. You Must Relax. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1957.
  7. Marciano E, Varrabba L, Giannini P, Sementina C, Verde P, Bruno C, et al. Psychiatric comorbidity in a population of outpatients affected by tinnitus. International Journal of Audiology 2003;42:4-9.
  8. Pavlov I. Conditioned Reflexes. London: Oxford University Press, 1927.
  9. Rief W, Weise C, Kley N, Martin A. Psychophysiologic treatment of chronic tinnitus: a randomized clinical trial. Psychosomatic Medicine 2005;67:833-8.
  10. Roberts L, Eggermont J, Caspary D, Shore S, Melcher J, Kaltenbach J. Ringing ears: the neuroscience of tinnitus. Journal of Neuroscience 2010;30:14972-9.
  11. Sanchez TG, Ferrari GMS. The control of tinnitus through hearing aids: suggestions for optimal use [O controle do zumbido por meio de prótese auditiva: sugestões para otimização do uso]. Pró-Fono Revista de Atualização Científica 2002;14:111-8.
  12. T Where review authors were also study authors, they had no involvement in study selection, data extraction or risk of bias assessment. Thomas Fuller: none known. Rilana Cima: was an investigator and author of the Cima 2012 study, which was a RCT comparing stepped CBT-based care with treatment as usual on the impact of tinnitus on quality of life.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fuller, T., Cima, R., Langguth, B., Mazurek, B., Vlaeyen, J. W., & Hoare, D. J.
Affiliations
  • Maastricht University (NL)
  • University of Regensburg (DE)
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-01-08
Volume
2020
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W4211059041
Cited by
212
References
201
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 1
FWCI
4.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Noise Effects and Management
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, tinnitus, depression, tinnitus rehabilitation, hearing loss, treatment outcomes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review