↓ Skip to main content

Different Patterns of Hearing Loss among Tinnitus Patients: A Latent Class Analysis of a Large Sample

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
9 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Different Patterns of Hearing Loss among Tinnitus Patients: A Latent Class Analysis of a Large Sample
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2017.00046
Pubmed ID
Authors

Berthold Langguth, Michael Landgrebe, Winfried Schlee, Martin Schecklmann, Veronika Vielsmeier, Thomas Steffens, Susanne Staudinger, Hannah Frick, Ulrich Frick

Abstract

The heterogeneity of tinnitus is a major challenge for tinnitus research. Even if a complex interaction of many factors is involved in the etiology of tinnitus, hearing loss (HL) has been identified as the most relevant etiologic factor. Here, we used a data-driven approach to identify patterns of hearing function in a large sample of tinnitus patients presenting in a tinnitus clinic. Data from 2,838 patients presenting at the Tinnitus Center of the University Regensburg between 2007 and 2014 have been analyzed. Standard audiometric data were frequency-wise categorized in four categories [a: normal hearing (0-20 dB HL); b: moderate HL (25-50 dB HL; representing outer hair cell loss); c: severe HL (>50 dB HL; representing outer and inner hair cell loss); d: no data available] and entered in a latent class analysis, a statistical method to find subtypes of cases in multivariate categorical data. To validate the clinical relevance of the identified latent classes, they were compared with respect to clinical and demographic characteristics of their members. The classification algorithm identified eight distinct latent classes with an excellent separation. Patient classes differed with respect to demographic (e.g., age, gender) and clinical characteristics (e.g., tinnitus location, tinnitus severity, gradual, or abrupt onset, etc.). Our results demonstrate that data-driven categorization of hearing function seems to be a promising approach for profiling tinnitus patients, as it revealed distinct subtypes that reflect prototypic forms of HL and that differ in several relevant clinical characteristics.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 29%
Other 6 12%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 17 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 22%
Neuroscience 5 10%
Psychology 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 21 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 November 2017.
All research outputs
#5,462,334
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#3,808
of 11,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,775
of 310,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#38
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,289 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.