High-frequency hearing loss among mobile phone users.

Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2014 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream

HarmLow evidencePaper 3185

In 100 mobile phone users, high-frequency audiometry showed a statistically significant loss in the dominant ear compared with the non-dominant ear (P < 0.05). The authors interpret this as chronic mobile phone use being associated with high-frequency hearing…

Study snapshot

PublicationIndian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2014

Study typeother

Reported directionHarm

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

The objective of this study is to assess high frequency hearing (above 8 kHz) loss among prolonged mobile phone users is a tertiary Referral Center. Prospective single blinded study. This is the first study that used high-frequency audiometry. The wide usage of mobile phone is so profound that we were unable to find enough non-users as a control group. Therefore we compared the non-dominant ear to the dominant ear using audiometric measurements. The study was a blinded study wherein the audiologist did not know which was the dominant ear. A total of 100 subjects were studied. Of the subjects studied 53% were males and 47% females. Mean age was 27. The left ear was dominant in 63%, 22% were dominant in the right ear and 15% did not have a preference. This study showed that there is significant loss in the dominant ear compared to the non-dominant ear (P < 0.05). Chronic usage mobile phone revealed high frequency hearing loss in the dominant ear (mobile phone used) compared to the non dominant ear.

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeother

Effect directionharm

PopulationMobile phone users at a tertiary referral center (mean age 27; 53% male, 47% female)

Sample size100

ExposureRF · prolonged/chronic usage (not further specified)

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Outcomes measured

High-frequency hearing loss (>8 kHz)
Audiometric differences between dominant (phone-used) ear and non-dominant ear

Limitations

No non-user control group; comparison was within-person (dominant vs non-dominant ear)
Exposure duration/intensity not quantified beyond 'prolonged/chronic'
Frequency/SAR of mobile phone exposure not reported

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "other",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "mobile phone",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "prolonged/chronic usage (not further specified)"
  },
  "population": "Mobile phone users at a tertiary referral center (mean age 27; 53% male, 47% female)",
  "sample_size": 100,
  "outcomes": [
    "High-frequency hearing loss (>8 kHz)",
    "Audiometric differences between dominant (phone-used) ear and non-dominant ear"
  ],
  "main_findings": "In 100 mobile phone users, high-frequency audiometry showed a statistically significant loss in the dominant ear compared with the non-dominant ear (P < 0.05). The authors interpret this as chronic mobile phone use being associated with high-frequency hearing loss in the phone-used (dominant) ear.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "No non-user control group; comparison was within-person (dominant vs non-dominant ear)",
    "Exposure duration/intensity not quantified beyond 'prolonged/chronic'",
    "Frequency/SAR of mobile phone exposure not reported"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "mobile phone",
    "RF exposure",
    "high-frequency audiometry",
    ">8 kHz",
    "hearing loss",
    "dominant ear",
    "single-blinded",
    "tertiary referral center"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1007/s12070-011-0406-4
PubMed: 24533378

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library