You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letters
Author response: noise-induced hearing loss: the diagnosis depends on the doctor’s belief
  1. Tania Schink1,
  2. Gunter Kreutz2,
  3. Veronika Busch3,
  4. Iris Pigeot1,
  5. Wolfgang Ahrens1,4
  1. 1 Department of Biometry and Data Management, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology—BIPS, Bremen, Germany
  2. 2 Department of Music, Carl von Ossietzky University, Oldenburg, Germany
  3. 3 Department of Musicology and Music Education, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
  4. 4 Department of Epidemiological Methods and Etiologic Research, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology—BIPS, Bremen, Germany
  5. 5 Institute of Statistics, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Professor Wolfgang Ahrens, Department of Epidemiological Methods and Etiologic Research, Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology—BIPS, Bremen 28359, Germany; ahrens{at}bips.uni-bremen.de

https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2014-102630

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We appreciate the opportunity to respond to the letter of Dr Engdahl1 regarding our article ‘Incidence and relative risk of hearing disorders in professional musicians’.2 Dr Engdahl raises the concern that the observed risk of musicians to suffer from noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is explained by detection bias.

    As NIHL and sensorineural hearing loss cannot be differentiated solely based on hearing tests, the diagnosis may …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles