Abstract
The spatial percept of tinnitus is hypothesized as an important variable for tinnitus subtyping. Hearing asymmetry often associates with tinnitus laterality, but not always. One of the methodological limitations for cross-study comparisons is how the variables for hearing asymmetry and tinnitus spatial perception are defined. In this study, data from two independent datasets were combined (n= 833 adults, age ranging from 20 to 91 years, 404 males, 429 females) to investigate characteristics of subgroups with different tinnitus spatial perception focusing on hearing asymmetry. Three principle findings emerged. First, a hearing asymmetry variable emphasizing the maximum interaural difference most strongly discriminated unilateral from bilateral tinnitus. Merging lateralized bilateral tinnitus (perceived in both ears but worse in one side) with unilateral tinnitus weakened this relationship. Second, there was an association between unilateral tinnitus and ipsilateral asymmetric hearing. Third, unilateral and bilateral tinnitus were phenotypically distinct, with unilateral tinnitus being characterized by older age, asymmetric hearing, more often wearing one hearing aid, older age at tinnitus onset, shorter tinnitus duration, and higher percentage of time being annoyed by tinnitus. We recommend that careful consideration is given to the definitions of hearing asymmetry and tinnitus spatial perception in order to improve the comparability of findings across studies.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement number 722046 and the GENDER-Net Co-Plus Fund (GNP-182). CRC received research funding from Decibel Therapeutics, Inc. DH is an NIHR Senior Investigator.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos