Cited by 55Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsHearing Loss and RehabilitationMental Health and Patient Involvement

Identifying and prioritizing unmet research questions for people with tinnitus: the James Lind Alliance Tinnitus Priority Setting Partnership

Hall, Deborah A, Mohamad, Najibah, Firkins, Lester, Fenton, Mark, Stockdale, David·2013·Clinical Investigation

Abstract

Tinnitus represents a major burden of disability, yet there is scant evidence for effective management strategies and a lack of clinical trials to formally test even some of the most commonly used drugs and medical devices. The James Lind Alliance gives a voice to patients and clinicians to identify and prioritize important clinical research questions concerning treatment uncertainties. This article describes the initiative conducted by the Tinnitus Priority Setting Partnership; how it was set up, what the consultation process was, and how the top ten research priorities were identified. For each priority, we recommend a research strategy; either calling for a systematic review or appropriate clinical study. We promote these as topics for commissioned research and as priority areas to encourage researcher-led funding applications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4155/cli.12.129

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 limited evidence of audiologist-delivered psychological interventions in the literature.

    “This confirms the conclusion drawn by the James Lind Alliance Tinnitus Priority Setting Partnership that there is limited evidence of audiologist-delivered psychological interventions in the literature (Hall et al. 2013).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hall, D. A., Mohamad, N., Firkins, L., Fenton, M., & Stockdale, D.
Venue
Clinical Investigation
Published
2013-01
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
21-28
ISSN
  • 2041-6792 (ISSN-L)
  • 2041-6806
OpenAlex
W2054921073
Cited by
55
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Clinical Investigation (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
Keywords
tinnitus, research priorities, James Lind Alliance, priority setting partnership, treatment uncertainty, tinnitus management, research funding strategy

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