21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A narrative synthesis of research evidence for tinnitus-related complaints as reported by patients and their significant others

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          There are a large number of assessment tools for tinnitus, with little consensus on what it is important to measure and no preference for a minimum reporting standard. The item content of tinnitus assessment tools should seek to capture relevant impacts of tinnitus on everyday life, but no-one has yet synthesised information about the range of tinnitus complaints. This review is thus the first comprehensive and authoritative collection and synthesis of what adults with tinnitus and their significant others report as problems in their everyday lives caused by tinnitus.

          Methods

          Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, as well as grey literature sources to identify publications from January 1980 to June 2015 in which participants were enrolled because tinnitus was their primary complaint. A manual search of seven relevant journals updated the search to December 2017. Of the 3699 titles identified overall, 84 records (reporting 86 studies) met our inclusion criteria and were taken through to data collection. Coders collated generic and tinnitus-specific complaints reported by people with tinnitus. All relevant data items were then analyzed using an iterative approach to narrative synthesis to form domain groupings representing complaints of tinnitus, which were compared patients and significant others.

          Results

          From the 86 studies analyzed using data collected from 16,381 patients, 42 discrete complaints were identified spanning physical and psychological health, quality of life and negative attributes of the tinnitus sound. This diversity was not captured by any individual study alone. There was good convergence between complaints collected using open- and closed-format questions, with the exception of general moods and perceptual attributes of tinnitus (location, loudness, pitch and unpleasantness); reported only using closed questions. Just two studies addressed data from the perspective of significant others ( n = 79), but there was substantial correspondence with the patient framework, especially regarding relationships and social life.

          Conclusions

          Our findings contribute fundamental new knowledge and a unique resource that enables investigators to appreciate the broad impacts of tinnitus on an individual. Our findings can also be used to guide questions during diagnostic assessment, to evaluate existing tinnitus-specific HR-QoL questionnaires and develop new ones, where necessary.

          Trial Registration

          PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015020629. Protocol published in BMJ Open. 2016;6e009171.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-018-0888-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references48

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Development of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory

          To develop a self-report tinnitus handicap measure that is brief, easy to administer and interpret, broad in scope, and psychometrically robust.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” – a practical guideline

            Background In cooperation with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) initiative aimed to develop a guideline on how to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes (i.e., constructs or domains) included in a “Core Outcome Set” (COS). A COS is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials of a specific disease or trial population. Methods Informed by a literature review to identify potentially relevant tasks on outcome measurement instrument selection, a Delphi study was performed among a panel of international experts, representing diverse stakeholders. In three consecutive rounds, panelists were asked to rate the importance of different tasks in the selection of outcome measurement instruments, to justify their choices, and to add other relevant tasks. Consensus was defined as being achieved when 70 % or more of the panelists agreed and when fewer than 15 % of the panelists disagreed. Results Of the 481 invited experts, 120 agreed to participate of whom 95 (79 %) completed the first Delphi questionnaire. We reached consensus on four main steps in the selection of outcome measurement instruments for COS: Step 1, conceptual considerations; Step 2, finding existing outcome measurement instruments, by means of a systematic review and/or a literature search; Step 3, quality assessment of outcome measurement instruments, by means of the evaluation of the measurement properties and feasibility aspects of outcome measurement instruments; and Step 4, generic recommendations on the selection of outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a COS (consensus ranged from 70 to 99 %). Conclusions This study resulted in a consensus-based guideline on the methods for selecting outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a COS. This guideline can be used by COS developers in defining how to measure core outcomes. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1555-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A methodological framework for assessing health indices

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                deborah.hall@nottingham.ac.uk
                kathryn.fackrell@nottingham.ac.uk
                abli1021@gmail.com
                rachelthavayogan@hotmail.co.uk
                sandra.smith@nottingham.ac.uk
                Veronica.Kennedy@boltonft.nhs.uk
                catarina.t.tinoco@gmail.com
                danielatrodrigues@gmail.com
                paulabcampelo@gmail.com
                tania.martins@jmellosaude.pt
                veramartinslourenco@gmail.com
                dlribeiro@icloud.com
                Haula.f.Haider@jmellosaude.pt
                Journal
                Health Qual Life Outcomes
                Health Qual Life Outcomes
                Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
                BioMed Central (London )
                1477-7525
                11 April 2018
                11 April 2018
                2018
                : 16
                : 61
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8868, GRID grid.4563.4, Otology and hearing group, Division of Clinical Neuroscience, School of Medicine, , University of Nottingham, ; Nottingham, NG7 2RD UK
                [2 ]National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, NG1 5DU UK
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8868, GRID grid.4563.4, School of Medicine, , University of Nottingham, ; Nottingham, NG7 2RD UK
                [4 ]GRID grid.487142.c, Department of Audiovestibular Medicine, Halliwell Health and Children’s Centre, , Bolton NHS Foundation Trust, ; Farnworth, UK
                [5 ]ENT Department, Hospital Cuf Infante Santo - Nova Medical School, Travessa do Castro, 3, 1350-070 Lisbon, Portugal
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2237 5901, GRID grid.410954.d, WJCR - William James Center for Research, , ISPA-Instituto Universitário, ; Rua Jardim do Tabaco, n°34, 1149-041 Lisbon, Portugal
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3804-1452
                Article
                888
                10.1186/s12955-018-0888-9
                5896078
                29642913
                729647c2-5c73-4e1e-b9fb-8ae82165f5d5
                © The Author(s). 2018

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 7 May 2017
                : 2 April 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000921, European Cooperation in Science and Technology;
                Award ID: BM1306
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research;
                Award ID: NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Health & Social care
                symptoms,adults,otology,audiology,people important outcomes
                Health & Social care
                symptoms, adults, otology, audiology, people important outcomes

                Comments

                Comment on this article