2005
DOI: 10.1097/00003446-200502000-00001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Longitudinal Study of Pure-Tone Thresholds in Older Persons

Abstract: On average, hearing threshold increased approximately 1 dB per year for subjects age 60 and over. Age, gender, and initial threshold levels can affect the rate of change in thresholds. Older female subjects (> or =70 years) had faster rate of change at 0.25 to 3, 10, and 11 kHz than younger female subjects (60 to 69 years). Older male subjects had faster rate of change at 6 kHz than younger male subjects. Females had a slower rate of change at 1 kHz and a faster rate of change at 6 to 12 kHz than males. Subjec… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

31
179
4
9

Year Published

2006
2006
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 228 publications
(231 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
31
179
4
9
Order By: Relevance
“…Methods commonly used to aid such allocations treat these components as though they add simply (with some compression for large shifts) in their contribution to the aggregate hearing loss recorded in a given ear (International Organization for Standardization, 1990Standardization, , 1999) (see also American College of Occupational Medicine, 1989). This notion has found support in a recent longitudinal study (Lee et al, 2005) reporting that threshold shifts over 3-11.5 year timespans were not significantly different for individuals with and without reported noise-exposure histories. However, two recent studies have yielded data that contradict this view (Gates et al, 2000;Rosenhall, 2003).…”
Section: Implications For Presbycusis and Hearing Loss Allocation In supporting
confidence: 55%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Methods commonly used to aid such allocations treat these components as though they add simply (with some compression for large shifts) in their contribution to the aggregate hearing loss recorded in a given ear (International Organization for Standardization, 1990Standardization, , 1999) (see also American College of Occupational Medicine, 1989). This notion has found support in a recent longitudinal study (Lee et al, 2005) reporting that threshold shifts over 3-11.5 year timespans were not significantly different for individuals with and without reported noise-exposure histories. However, two recent studies have yielded data that contradict this view (Gates et al, 2000;Rosenhall, 2003).…”
Section: Implications For Presbycusis and Hearing Loss Allocation In supporting
confidence: 55%
“…This issue of AHL/NIHL interaction has obvious public health significance (Gates et al, 2000;Rosenhall, 2003;Lee et al, 2005) given the high prevalence of noise exposure in and the aging of our society. Concern about long-term effects of noise exposure in young ears is heightened by reports of increasing NIHL prevalence earlier in life (Wallhagen et al, 1997;National Institutes of Health, 2000;Folmer et al, 2002).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lee dkk. 5 menemukan hubungan usia dengan penurunan ambang dengar rata-rata pada usia lanjut. Nilai ambang dengar meningkat 1 dB setiap tahunnya pada usia 60 tahun ke atas dan terdapat perbedaan penurunan ambang dengar pada frekuensi 4 dan 8 kHz secara signifikan antara laki-laki dan perempuan.…”
Section: Pendahuluanunclassified
“…16 Lee dkk. 5 dalam penelitian sebelumnya menemukan hubungan antara usia dan penurunan ambang dengar pada usia lanjut. Nilai ambang dengar rata-rata meningkat 1 dB setiap tahunnya pada usia 60 tahun ke atas.…”
Section: Pembahasanunclassified
“…Addressing the ARHL-NIHL interaction in humans is difficult and the results of studies on hearing losses in noise-exposed and/or ageing ears are contradictory and highly variable [22][23][24][25]. This variability may arise from underlying differences in actual noise exposure and because, in part, noise and ageing are both under the influence of other intrinsic and environmental variables that can, by themselves, lead to HL or alter NIHL and/or ARHL vulnerability.…”
Section: Ageing and Hearing Loss 191mentioning
confidence: 99%