Thank you for downloading using multivariate statistics. As you may know, people have look hundreds times for their favorite novels like this using multivariate statistics, but end up in infectious downloads. Rather than reading a good book with a cup of tea in the afternoon, instead they juggled with some harmful bugs inside their laptop. using multivariate statistics is available in our digital library an online access to it is set as public so you can download it instantly. Our books collection saves in multiple locations, allowing you to get the most less latency time to download any of our books like this one. Merely said, the using multivariate statistics is universally compatible with any devices to read.

Using Multivariate Statistics

Tuning out the noise: limbic-auditory interactions in tinnitus.

This paper presents diagnostic criteria for Menière's disease jointly formulated by the Classification Committee of the Bárány Society, The Japan Society for Equilibrium Research, the European Academy of Otology and Neurotology (EAONO), the Equilibrium Committee of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) and the Korean Balance Society. The classification includes two categories: definite Menière's disease and probable Menière's disease. The diagnosis of definite Menière's disease is based on clinical criteria and requires the observation of an episodic vertigo syndrome associated with low- to medium-frequency sensorineural hearing loss and fluctuating aural symptoms (hearing, tinnitus and/or fullness) in the affected ear. Duration of vertigo episodes is limited to a period between 20 minutes and 12 hours. Probable Menière's disease is a broader concept defined by episodic vestibular symptoms (vertigo or dizziness) associated with fluctuating aural symptoms occurring in a period from 20 minutes to 24 hours.

Diagnostic Criteria for Meniere's Disease

Objective. Tinnitus is the perception of sound without an external source. More than 50 million people in the United States have reported experiencing tinnitus, resulting in an estimated prevalence of 10% to 15% in adults. Despite the high prevalence of tinnitus and its potential significant effect on quality of life, there are no evidence-based, multidisciplinary clinical practice guidelines to assist clinicians with management. The focus of this guideline is on tinnitus that is both bothersome and persistent (lasting 6 months or longer), which often negatively affects the patient’s quality of life. The target audience for the guideline is any clinician, including nonphysicians, involved in managing patients with tinnitus. The target patient population is limited to adults (18 years and older) with primary tinnitus that is persistent and bothersome. Purpose. The purpose of this guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinicians managing patients with tinnitus. This guideline provides clinicians with a logical framework to improve patient care and mitigate the personal and social effects of persistent, bothersome tinnitus. It will discuss the evaluation of patients with tinnitus, including selection and timing of diagnostic testing and specialty referral to identify potential underlying treatable pathology. It will then focus on the evaluation and treatment of patients with persistent primary tinnitus, with recommendations to guide the evaluation and measurement of the effect of tinnitus and to determine the most appropriate interventions to improve symptoms and quality of life for tinnitus sufferers. Action Statements. The development group made a strong recommendation that clinicians distinguish patients with bothersome tinnitus from patients with nonbothersome tinnitus. The development group made a strong recommendation against obtaining imaging studies of the head and neck in patients with tinnitus, specifically to evaluate tinnitus that does not localize to 1 ear, is nonpulsatile, and is not associated with focal neurologic abnormalities or an asymmetric hearing loss. The panel made the following recommendations: Clinicians should (a) perform a targeted history and physical examination at the initial evaluation of a patient with presumed primary tinnitus to identify conditions that if promptly identified and managed may relieve tinnitus; (b) obtain a prompt, comprehensive audiologic examination in patients with tinnitus that is unilateral, persistent (≥ 6 months), or associated with hearing difficulties; (c) distinguish patients with bothersome tinnitus of recent onset from those with persistent symptoms (≥ 6 months) to prioritize intervention and facilitate discussions about natural history and follow-up care; (d) educate patients with persistent, bothersome tinnitus about management strategies; (e) recommend a hearing aid evaluation for patients who have persistent, bothersome tinnitus associated with documented hearing loss; and (f) recommend cognitive behavioral therapy to patients with persistent, bothersome tinnitus. The panel recommended against (a) antidepressants, anticonvulsants, anxiolytics, or intratympanic medications for the routine treatment of patients with persistent, bothersome tinnitus; (b) Ginkgo biloba, melatonin, zinc, or other dietary supplements for treating patients with persistent, bothersome tinnitus; and (c) transcranial magnetic stimulation for the routine treatment of patients with persistent, bothersome tinnitus. The development group provided the following options: Clinicians may (a) obtain an initial comprehensive audiologic examination in patients who present with tinnitus (regardless of laterality, duration, or perceived hearing status); 545325

/pdf/clinical-practice-guideline-tinnitus-3ptl4asefl.pdf

Clinical Practice Guideline: Tinnitus

1.

There is an increased prevalence of depressive symptoms in individuals with tinnitus.




2.

Affective disorders, together with personality factors, play an important role in creating the distress experienced by many individuals with tinnitus.




3.

The co-occurrence of tinnitus and depression may be explained by the involvement of limbic brain structures in the pathophysiology of tinnitus.




4.

Tinnitus is associated with neuroendocrine alterations, which are characteristic for depressive disorders.




5.

Patients with tinnitus and depression should be efficiently treated.




6.

Efficient treatment of co-morbid depressive symptoms has to consider a large variety of possible underlying disorders.

Tinnitus and depression

The mechanisms of tinnitus: perspectives from human functional neuroimaging.

Background
Tinnitus is described as the perception of sound or noise in the absence of real acoustic stimulation. In the current absence of a cure for tinnitus, clinical management typically focuses on reducing the effects of co-morbid symptoms such as distress or hearing loss. Hearing loss is commonly co-morbid with tinnitus and so logic implies that amplification of external sounds by hearing aids will reduce perception of the tinnitus sound and the distress associated with it.

Objectives
To assess the effects of hearing aids specifically in terms of tinnitus benefit in patients with tinnitus and co-existing hearing loss.

Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 19 August 2013.

Selection criteria
Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials recruiting adults with subjective tinnitus and some degree of hearing loss, where the intervention involves amplification with hearing aids and this is compared to interventions involving other medical devices, other forms of standard or complementary therapy, or combinations of therapies, no intervention or placebo interventions.

Data collection and analysis
Three authors independently screened all selected abstracts. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed those potentially suitable studies for risk of bias. For studies meeting the inclusion criteria, we used the mean difference (MD) to compare hearing aids with other interventions and controls.

Main results
One randomised controlled trial (91 participants) was included in this review. We judged the trial to have a low risk of bias for method of randomisation and outcome reporting, and an unclear risk of bias for other criteria. No non-randomised controlled trials meeting our inclusion criteria were identified. The included study measured change in tinnitus severity (primary measure of interest) using a tinnitus questionnaire measure, and change in tinnitus loudness (secondary measure of interest) on a visual analogue scale. Other secondary outcome measures of interest, namely change in the psychoacoustic characteristics of tinnitus, change in self reported anxiety, depression and quality of life, and change in neurophysiological measures, were not investigated in this study. The included study compared hearing aid use to sound generator use. The estimated effect on change in tinnitus loudness or severity as measured by the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory score was compatible with benefits for both hearing aids or sound generators but no difference was found between the two alternative treatments (MD -0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) -7.92 to 6.12) (100-point scale); moderate quality evidence. No negative or adverse events were reported.

Authors' conclusions
The current evidence base for hearing aid prescription for tinnitus is limited. To be useful, future studies should make appropriate use of blinding and be consistent in their use of outcome measures. Whilst hearing aids are sometimes prescribed as part of tinnitus management, there is currently no evidence to support or refute their use as a more routine intervention for tinnitus.

/pdf/amplification-with-hearing-aids-for-patients-with-tinnitus-4diborms51.pdf

Amplification with hearing aids for patients with tinnitus and co‐existing hearing loss

Objective: We explored the relationship between audiogram shape and tinnitus pitch to answer questions arising from neurophysiological models of tinnitus: ‘Is the dominant tinnitus pitch associated with the edge of hearing loss?’ and ‘Is such a relationship more robust in people with narrow tinnitus bandwidth or steep sloping hearing loss?’ Design: A broken-stick fitting objectively quantified slope, degree and edge of hearing loss up to 16 kHz. Tinnitus pitch was characterized up to 12 kHz. We used correlation and multiple regression analyses for examining relationships with many potentially predictive audiometric variables. Study Sample: 67 people with chronic bilateral tinnitus (43 men and 24 women, aged from 22 to 81 years). Results: In this ample of 67 subjects correlation failed to reveal any relationship between the tinnitus pitch and the edge frequency. The tinnitus pitch generally fell within the area of hearing loss. The pitch of the tinnitus in a subset of subjects with a narrow tinnitu...

Re-examining the relationship between audiometric profile and tinnitus pitch.

Tinnitus is an auditory phenomenon characterised by the perception of a sound in the absence of an external auditory stimulus. Chronic subjective tinnitus is almost certainly maintained via central mechanisms, and this is consistent with observed measures of altered spontaneous brain activity. A number of putative central auditory mechanisms for tinnitus have been proposed. The influential thalamocortical dysrhythmia model suggests that tinnitus can be attributed to the disruption of coherent oscillatory activity between thalamus and cortex following hearing loss. However, the extent to which this disruption specifically contributes to tinnitus or is simply a consequence of the hearing loss is unclear because the necessary matched controls have not been tested. Here, we rigorously test several predictions made by this model in four groups of participants (tinnitus with hearing loss, tinnitus with clinically normal hearing, no tinnitus with hearing loss and no tinnitus with clinically normal hearing). Magnetoencephalography was used to measure oscillatory brain activity within different frequency bands in a ‘resting’ state and during presentation of a masking noise. Results revealed that low-frequency activity in the delta band (1–4 Hz) was significantly higher in the ‘tinnitus with hearing loss’ group compared to the ‘no tinnitus with normal hearing’ group. A planned comparison indicated that this effect was unlikely to be driven by the hearing loss alone, but could possibly be a consequence of tinnitus and hearing loss. A further interpretative linkage to tinnitus was given by the result that the delta activity tended to reduce when tinnitus was masked. High-frequency activity in the gamma band (25–80 Hz) was not correlated with tinnitus (or hearing loss). The findings partly support the thalamocortical dysrhythmia model and suggest that slow-wave (delta band) activity may be a more reliable correlate of tinnitus than high-frequency activity.

/pdf/neuromagnetic-indicators-of-tinnitus-and-tinnitus-masking-in-4l471vx8rm.pdf

Neuromagnetic indicators of tinnitus and tinnitus masking in patients with and without hearing loss.

Background Tinnitus affects 10% to 15% of the adult population, with about 20% of these experiencing symptoms that negatively affect quality of life. In England alone there are an estimated ¾ million general practice consultations every year where the primary complaint is tinnitus, equating to a major burden on healthcare services. Clinical management strategies include education and advice, relaxation therapy, tinnitus retraining therapy (TRT), cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), sound enrichment using ear-level sound generators or hearing aids, and drug therapies to manage co-morbid symptoms such as insomnia, anxiety or depression. Hearing aids, sound generators and combination devices (amplification and sound generation within one device) are a component of many tinnitus management programmes and together with information and advice are a first line of management in audiology departments for someone who has tinnitus. Objectives To assess the effects of sound therapy (using amplification devices and/or sound generators) for tinnitus in adults. Search methods The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, via the Cochrane Register of Studies); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 23 July 2018. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with acute or chronic subjective idiopathic tinnitus. We included studies where the intervention involved hearing aids, sound generators or combination hearing aids and compared them to waiting list control, placebo or education/information only with no device. We also included studies comparing hearing aids to sound generators, combination hearing aids to hearing aids, and combination hearing aids to sound generators. Data collection and analysis We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were tinnitus symptom severity as measured as a global score on multi-item tinnitus questionnaire and significant adverse effects as indicated by an increase in self-reported tinnitus loudness. Our secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms, symptoms of generalised anxiety, health-related quality of life and adverse effects associated with wearing the device such as pain, discomfort, tenderness or skin irritation, or ear infections. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics. Main results This review included eight studies (with a total of 590 participants). Seven studies investigated the effects of hearing aids, four combination hearing aids and three sound generators. Seven studies were parallel-group RCTs and one had a cross-over design. In general, risk of bias was unclear due to lack of detail about sequence generation and allocation concealment. There was also little or no use of blinding.No data for our outcomes were available for any of our three main comparisons (comparing hearing aids, sound generators and combination devices with a waiting list control group, placebo or education/information only). Data for our additional comparisons (comparing these devices with each other) were also few, with limited potential for data pooling.Hearing aid only versus sound generator device onlyOne study compared patients fitted with sound generators versus those fitted with hearing aids and found no difference between them in their effects on our primary outcome, tinnitus symptom severity measured with the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) at 3, 6 or 12 months (low-quality evidence). The use of both types of device was associated with a clinically significant reduction in tinnitus symptom severity.Combination hearing aid versus hearing aid onlyThree studies compared combination hearing aids with hearing aids and measured tinnitus symptom severity using the THI or Tinnitus Functional Index. When we pooled the data we found no difference between them (standardised mean difference -0.15, 95% confidence interval -0.52 to 0.22; three studies; 114 participants) (low-quality evidence). The use of both types of device was again associated with a clinically significant reduction in tinnitus symptom severity.Adverse effects were not assessed in any of the included studies.None of the studies measured the secondary outcomes of depressive symptoms or depression, anxiety symptoms or generalised anxiety, or health-related quality of life as measured by a validated instrument, nor the newly developed core outcomes tinnitus intrusiveness, ability to ignore, concentration, quality of sleep and sense of control. Authors' conclusions There is no evidence to support the superiority of sound therapy for tinnitus over waiting list control, placebo or education/information with no device. There is insufficient evidence to support the superiority or inferiority of any of the sound therapy options (hearing aid, sound generator or combination hearing aid) over each other. The quality of evidence for the reported outcomes, assessed using GRADE, was low. Using a combination device, hearing aid or sound generator might result in little or no difference in tinnitus symptom severity.Future research into the effectiveness of sound therapy in patients with tinnitus should use rigorous methodology. Randomisation and blinding should be of the highest quality, given the subjective nature of tinnitus and the strong likelihood of a placebo response. The CONSORT statement should be used in the design and reporting of future studies. We also recommend the use of validated, patient-centred outcome measures for research in the field of tinnitus.

Magdalena Sereda

Papers

The mechanisms of tinnitus: perspectives from human functional neuroimaging.

Amplification with hearing aids for patients with tinnitus and co‐existing hearing loss

Re-examining the relationship between audiometric profile and tinnitus pitch.

Neuromagnetic indicators of tinnitus and tinnitus masking in patients with and without hearing loss.

Sound therapy (using amplification devices and/or sound generators) for tinnitus.