↓ Skip to main content

The impact of hearing impairment and noise-induced hearing injury on quality of life in the active-duty military population: challenges to the study of this issue

Overview of attention for article published in Military Medical Research, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
The impact of hearing impairment and noise-induced hearing injury on quality of life in the active-duty military population: challenges to the study of this issue
Published in
Military Medical Research, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40779-016-0082-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hasanat Alamgir, Caryn A. Turner, Nicole J. Wong, Sharon P. Cooper, Jose A. Betancourt, James Henry, Andrew J. Senchak, Tanisha L. Hammill, Mark D. Packer

Abstract

The objectives of this research were to 1) summarize the available evidence on the impact of hearing loss on quality of life (QOL) among U.S. active-duty service members, 2) describe the QOL instruments that have been used to quantify the impact of hearing loss on quality of life, 3) examine national population-level secondary databases and report on their utility for studying the impact of hearing loss on QOL among active-duty service members, and 4) provide recommendations for future studies that seek to quantify the impact of hearing loss in this population. There is a lack of literature that addresses the intersection of hearing impairment, the military population, and quality of life measures. For audiological research, U.S. military personnel offer a unique research population, as they are exposed to noise levels and blast environments that are highly unusual in civilian work settings and can serve as a model population for studying the impact on QOL associated with these conditions. Our team recommends conducting a study on the active-duty service member population using a measurement instrument suitable for determining decreases in QOL specifically due to hearing loss.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 33 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 15%
Student > Master 5 15%
Researcher 5 15%
Lecturer 4 12%
Other 4 12%
Other 11 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 11 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 26%
Neuroscience 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Environmental Science 2 6%
Other 6 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 08 May 2016.
All research outputs
#11,127,669
of 12,512,072 outputs
Outputs from Military Medical Research
#113
of 118 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,556
of 263,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Military Medical Research
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,512,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 118 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 263,185 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.