The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Tinnitus Functional Index: Development of a New Clinical Measure for Chronic, Intrusive Tinnitus
Abstract
Objectives Chronic subjective tinnitus is a prevalent condition that causes significant distress to millions of Americans. Effective tinnitus treatments are urgently needed, but evaluating them is hampered by the lack of standardized measures that are validated for both intake assessment and evaluation of treatment outcomes. This work was designed to develop a new self-report questionnaire, the Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI), that would have documented validity both for scaling the severity and negative impact of tinnitus for use in intake assessment and for measuring treatment-related changes in tinnitus (responsiveness) and that would provide comprehensive coverage of multiple tinnitus severity domains. Design To use preexisting knowledge concerning tinnitus-related problems, an Item Selection Panel (17 expert judges) surveyed the content (175 items) of nine widely used tinnitus questionnaires. From those items, the Panel identified 13 separate domains of tinnitus distress and selected 70 items most likely to be responsive to treatment effects. Eliminating redundant items while retaining good content validity and adding new items to achieve the recommended minimum of 3 to 4 items per domain yielded 43 items, which were then used for constructing TFI Prototype 1.Prototype 1 was tested at five clinics. The 326 participants included consecutive patients receiving tinnitus treatment who provided informed consent-constituting a convenience sample. Construct validity of Prototyp…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
Cites
The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual Framework and Item Selection
Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002 · Cited by 30,033
Missing data: our view of the state of the art
Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.2.147 · Cited by 11,638
Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research.
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.4.3.272 · Cited by 9,587
Norman, G. R., Sloan, J. A., & Wyrwich, K. W. (2003) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000062554.74615.4c · Cited by 4,700
Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations
Turk, D. C., Dworkin, R. H., Allen, R. R., Bellamy, N., Brandenburg, N., Carr, D. B., Cleeland, C., Dionne, R., Farrar, J. T., Galer, B. S., et al. (2003) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2003.08.001 · Cited by 3,510 · cited 1×
“The potential benefits to be derived from developing a “core set” of measures have been emphasized for tinnitus research and clinical practice (Axelsson 1992; Meikle & Griest 2002) as well as in many other health contexts (Tugwell & Boers 1993; van der Heijde et al. 1997; Cox et al. 2000; Turk et al. 2003).”
BackgroundSelf-citationContent validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods.
Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037//1040-3590.7.3.238 · Cited by 2,387 · cited 1×
“Methods Item Selection Panel • To maximize construct validity, selection of items for the new questionnaire followed recommendations of Haynes et al. (1995) to use multiple judges of content validity and to quantify their judgments using formalized scaling procedures.”
MethodDevelopment of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory.
Newman, C., Jacobson, G., & Spitzer, J. (1996) · Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1001/archotol.1996.01890140029007 · Cited by 2,140
Self-citationA measure of quality of life for clinical trials in chronic lung disease
Guyatt, G. H., Berman, L. B., Townsend, M., Pugsley, S. O., & Chambers, L. W. (1987) · Thorax · doi:10.1136/thx.42.10.773 · Cited by 1,721
Factor analysis and scale revision.
Reise, S. P., Waller, N. G., & Comrey, A. L. (2000) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.12.3.287 · Cited by 855
The role of the bifactor model in resolving dimensionality issues in health outcomes measures
Reise, S. P., Morizot, J., & Hays, R. D. (2007) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-007-9183-7 · Cited by 747
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Newman, 1998, W., Sandridge S. A., Jacobson G. P.. Psychometric adequacy of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) for evaluating treatment outcome., J Am Acad Audiol, 9, 153
- Sweetow, 1990, W., Levy M. C. Tinnitus severity scaling for diagnostictherapeutic usage., Hear Instrum, 41, 44
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Baguley, D., McFerran, D., & Hall, D. (2013) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60142-7 · Cited by 1,245
Clinical practice guideline: tinnitus
Tunkel, D. E., Bauer, C. A., Sun, G. H., Rosenfeld, R. M., Chandrasekhar, S. S., Cunningham, E. R., Archer, S. M., Blakley, B. W., Carter, J. M., Granieri, E. C., et al. (2014) · Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1177/0194599814545325 · Cited by 769
Self-citationA systematic review of the reporting of tinnitus prevalence and severity
McCormack, A., Edmondson-Jones, M., Somerset, S., & Hall, D. (2016) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/j.heares.2016.05.009 · Cited by 715
A multidisciplinary European guideline for tinnitus: diagnostics, assessment, and treatment
Cima, R. F. F., Mazurek, B., Haider, H., Kikidis, D., Lapira, A., Noreña, A., & Hoare, D. J. (2019) · HNO · doi:10.1007/s00106-019-0633-7 · Cited by 442
Underlying Mechanisms of Tinnitus: Review and Clinical Implications
Henry, J. A., Roberts, L. E., Caspary, D. M., Theodoroff, S. M., & Salvi, R. (2014) · Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · doi:10.3766/jaaa.25.1.2 · Cited by 268
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Meikle, M. B., Henry, J. A., Griest, S. E., Stewart, B. J., Abrams, H. B., McArdle, R., Myers, P. J., Newman, C. W., Sandridge, S., Turk, D. C., Folmer, R. L., Frederick, E. J., House, J. W., Jacobson, G. P., Kinney, S. E., Martin, W. H., Nagler, S. M., Reich, G. E., Searchfield, G., Sweetow, R., & Vernon, J. A.
- Affiliations
- Oregon Health & Science University (US)
- Bay Pines VA Healthcare System (US)
- James A. Haley Veterans' Hospital (US)
- Cleveland Clinic (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- House Clinic (US)
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- University of Auckland (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Henry, James A.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Ear & Hearing
- Published
- 2012-03
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 153-176
- ISSN
- 0196-0202 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2001993563
- Cited by
- 792
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 55 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 85 · 2022: 87 · 2021: 76 · 2020: 69 · 2019: 68 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 6.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Ear and Hearing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Acoustics and Ultrasonics › Noise Effects and Management
- Keywords
- Tinnitus Functional Index, chronic subjective tinnitus, tinnitus severity, tinnitus distress, self-report questionnaire development, treatment outcome assessment, responsiveness, content validity, construct validity, Tinnitus Handicap Inventory, convergent and discriminant validity, factor structure, patient-reported outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Chronic Disease, Depression, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Medical History Taking, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Tinnitus, Reproducibility of Results, Self Report
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
