2009
DOI: 10.1590/s0104-56872009000100010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ruído e idade: análise da influência na audição em indivíduos com 50 - 70 anos

Abstract: The auditory thresholds of individuals with ages between 50 and 70 years are worse for the group that is exposed to noise. Noise is a higher risk factor than age when considering neurossensorial hearing losses.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0
3

Year Published

2009
2009
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
3
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…These findings corroborate research that found that older workers with a longer time of service are most vulnerable to hearing impairment. 9 27 It is noteworthy that the age factor may also affect the results, especially in high-frequency hearing thresholds, because those with longer service as a dentist are also older. 23 28 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These findings corroborate research that found that older workers with a longer time of service are most vulnerable to hearing impairment. 9 27 It is noteworthy that the age factor may also affect the results, especially in high-frequency hearing thresholds, because those with longer service as a dentist are also older. 23 28 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…o desenvolvimento de problemas auditivos [5][6][7][8] . No ambiente escolar, em específico, pode ocasionar danos ao processo de ensino-aprendizagem, por interferir na realização de atividades 9,10 .…”
Section: Conflito De Interesses: Inexistenteunclassified
“…The more rigid cutoff point adopted to identify hearing loss used here takes account of the fact that NIHL does not attain over 75 dB HL at high frequencies or 40 dB HL at low ones. 24,30 In relation the analysis of frequencies 3, 4, and 6 kHz (HL3), we observed that HL3 did not present good sensitivity. However, we found higher values compared with those for HL2.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%