CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 140Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsHearing Loss and RehabilitationNoise Effects and Management

Prevalence of tinnitus and hyperacusis in children and adolescents: a systematic review

Open access
Rosing, Susanne Nemholt, Schmidt, Jesper Hvass, Wedderkopp, Niels, Baguley, David M·2016·BMJ Open
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010596PMC PMC4893873
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Objectives: To systematically review studies of the epidemiology of tinnitus and hyperacusis in children and young people, in order to determine the methodological differences implicated in the variability of prevalence estimates and the influence of population characteristics on childhood tinnitus and hyperacusis. Data sources: Articles were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus databases and from the relevant reference lists using the methods described in the study protocol, which has previously been published. Reporting Items for Systematic Review (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Eligibility criteria: Studies addressing childhood prevalence, for example, children and young people aged 5–19 years. Data selection: 2 reviewers independently assessed the studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed study consistency. Owing to the heterogeneity in the methodologies among the reported studies, only narrative synthesis of the results was carried out. Results: Having identified 1032 publications, 131 articles were selected and 25 articles met the inclusion criteria and had sufficient methodological consistency to be included. Prevalence estimates of tinnitus range from 4.7% to 46% in the general paediatric population and among children with normal hearing, and from 23.5% to 62.2% of population of children with hearing loss. Reported prevalence ranged from 6% to 41.9% when children with hearing loss and normal hearing were both included. The prevalence of hyperacusis varied from 3.2% to 17.1%. Conclusions: Data on prevalence vary considerably according to the study design, study population and the research question posed. The age range of children studied was varied and a marked degree of variation between definitions (tinnitus, hyperacusis) and measures (severity, perception, annoyance) was observed. The lack of consistency among studies indicates the necessity of examining the epidemiology of tinnitus and hyperacusis in children and adolescents with a set of standardised criteria. Trial registration number: CRD42014013456.

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 · 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010596

Cites

56 of 56 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?

  • In children and adolescents, variability in the wording of the enquiry in prevalence studies is so great as to render comparison across studies meaningless.

    “In children and adolescents, the variability in wording of the enquiry in prevalence studies has been found to be so great as to render comparison across studies to be meaningless [4].”

    From Clinical Interventions for Hyperacusis in Adults: A Scoping Review to Assess the Current Position and Determine Priorities for Research (2017) · cites this paper as [4]

    The Results (Heterogeneity across studies) say that differences in tinnitus-question wording and definition can make direct comparison impossible, even within otherwise comparable groups. But the Discussion (Heterogeneity across studies) says some comparisons remain possible, particularly within identical population groups. The claim overstates this qualified finding by calling comparison across studies meaningless in general. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Data on the prevalence of hyperacusis is strongly influenced by how the enquiry about the symptom was worded.

    “As with other subjective symptoms, data on the prevalence of hyperacusis is strongly influenced by how the enquiry about the symptom was worded.”

    From Clinical Interventions for Hyperacusis in Adults: A Scoping Review to Assess the Current Position and Determine Priorities for Research (2017) · cites this paper as [4]

    In Results, “Methodology differences (hyperacusis),” the review shows that different question wording and response thresholds yielded substantially different prevalence estimates. In “Limitations of this study,” it says the question asked and how it is asked will potentially affect results. The cited review concerns children and adolescents, and its qualified finding does not fully establish the claim’s unqualified, strong influence on hyperacusis prevalence generally. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [36]Nodar R Tinnitus aurium in school age children: a survey. J Aud Res 1972; 12: 133– 25.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Rosing, S. N., Schmidt, J. H., Wedderkopp, N., & Baguley, D. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern Denmark (DK)
  • Murdoch University (AU)
  • Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Rosing, Susanne Nemholt
ORCID
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2016-06
Volume
6
Issue
6
Pages
e010596
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010596
PMC
PMC4893873
OpenAlex
W2205932817
Cited by
140
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Region Hovedstaden
  • Syddansk Universitet
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, hyperacusis, adolescents, prevalence, hearing loss, methodological heterogeneity, prevalence estimates, tinnitus severity, tinnitus annoyance
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Child, Female, Humans, Male, Hyperacusis, Referral and Consultation, Research Design, Tinnitus, Comorbidity, Prevalence

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