To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge-org.demo.remotlog.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To investigate the association between Healthy Eating Index 2015 scores and hearing loss.
Methods
This study used cross-sectional data from individuals aged over 20 years (n = 5171) who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 1999 to 2012 and from 2015 to 2018. Information was collected on their hearing, Healthy Eating Index 2015 scores, and several other important covariates using multivariate regression analyses.
Results
After adjusting for potential confounders, when hearing loss was defined as ≥20 dB, the odds ratios for low-frequency and high-frequency hearing loss were 0.99 (95 per cent confidence interval (CI) = 0.98−0.99, p < 0.001) and 0.99 (95 per cent CI = 0.98−1, p = 0.006), respectively. When hearing loss was defined as >25 dB, the odds ratios for low-frequency hearing loss and speech-frequency band hearing loss were 0.98 (95 per cent CI = 0.98−0.99, p < 0.001) and 0.99 (95 per cent CI = 0.98−1, p = 0.008), respectively.
Conclusion
In U.S. adults, the Healthy Eating Index 2015 is associated with hearing loss.
The aim of this study was to investigate the association between the Healthy Eating Index 2015 scores and hearing loss.
Methods
This study utilized cross-sectional data from individuals aged over 20 years (n = 5171) who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 1999 to 2012 and 2015 to 2018. We collected information on their hearing, Healthy Eating Index 2015 scores and several other important covariates using multivariate regression analyses.
Results
After adjusting for potential confounders, when hearing loss was defined as greater than or equal to 20 dB, the odds ratio for low-frequency hearing loss and high-frequency hearing loss was 0.99 (95 per cent confidence interval: 0.98–0.99; p < 0.001) and 0.99 (95 per cent confidence interval: 0.98–1; p = 0.006), respectively. When hearing loss was defined as greater than 25 dB, the odds ratio for low-frequency hearing loss and speech-frequency band hearing loss was 0.98 (95 per cent confidence interval: 0.98–0.99; p < 0.001) and 0.99 (95 per cent confidence interval: 0.98–1; p = 0.008), respectively.
Conclusion
In American adults, Healthy Eating Index scores are associated with hearing loss.
To determine sociodemographic factors associated with occupational, recreational and firearm-related noise exposure.
Methods
This nationally representative, multistage, stratified, cluster cross-sectional study sampled eligible National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey participants aged 20–69 years (n = 4675) about exposure to occupational and recreational noise and recurrent firearm usage, using a weighted multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Results
Thirty-four per cent of participants had exposure to occupational noise and 12 per cent to recreational noise, and 13 per cent repeatedly used firearms. Males were more likely than females to have exposure to all three noise types (adjusted odds ratio range = 2.63–14.09). Hispanics and Asians were less likely to have exposure to the three noise types than Whites. Blacks were less likely than Whites to have occupational and recurrent firearm noise exposure. Those with insurance were 26 per cent less likely to have exposure to occupational noise than those without insurance (adjusted odds ratio = 0.74, 95 per cent confidence interval = 0.60–0.93).
Conclusion
Whites, males and uninsured people are more likely to have exposure to potentially hazardous loud noise.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.