Cited by 17Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsHearing Loss and RehabilitationNoise Effects and Management

Differences in characteristics between people with tinnitus that seek help and that do not.

Open access
Rademaker, M. M., Stegeman, I., Brabers, A. E. M., de Jong, J. D., Stokroos, R. J., Smit, A. L.·2021·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Knowledge on characteristics of people that seek help for tinnitus is scarce. The primary objective of this study was to describe differences in characteristics between people with tinnitus that seek help compared to those who do not seek help. Next, we described differences in characteristics between those with and without tinnitus. In this cross-sectional study, we sent a questionnaire on characteristics in different domains; demographic, tinnitus-specific, general- and psychological health, auditory and noise- and substance behaviour. We assessed if participants had sought help or planned to seek help for tinnitus. Tinnitus distress was defined with the Tinnitus Functional Index. Differences between groups (help seeking: yes/no, tinnitus: yes/no) were described. 932 people took part in our survey. Two hundred and sixteen participants were defined as having tinnitus (23.2%). Seventy-three of those sought or planned to seek help. A constant tinnitus pattern, a varying tinnitus loudness, and hearing loss, were described more frequently in help seekers. Help seekers reported higher TFI scores. Differences between help seekers and people not seeking help were mainly identified in tinnitus- and audiological characteristics. These outcomes might function as a foundation to explore the heterogeneity in tinnitus patients.

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 · 10.1038/s41598-021-01632-5

Cites

34 of 34 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?

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

2 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rademaker, M. M., Stegeman, I., Brabers, A. E. M., de Jong, J. D., Stokroos, R. J., & Smit, A. L.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research (NL)
Corresponding author
Rademaker, M. M.
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2021-11-25
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
22949-22949
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3215169737
Cited by
17
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4
FWCI
1.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
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
tinnitus, help-seeking, help-seeking intentions, tinnitus distress, Tinnitus Functional Index, tinnitus loudness, hearing loss, mental health, substance use, patient heterogeneity
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Auditory Perception, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Hearing, Humans, Male, Mental Health, Middle Aged, Netherlands, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Tinnitus, Cost of Illness

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