Evidence Hub

Auditory function and brainstem responses in allergic rhinitis: systematic review and meta-analysis

Thales Rafael Correia de Melo Lima, Brenda Carla Lima Araújo, S. de Magalhães Simões, P. Martins-Filho

International Symposium on Cooperative Database Systems for Advanced Applications, 2025

432 participants

Abstract

ABSTRACT Purpose To investigate differences in auditory thresholds and brainstem evoked response audiometry (BERA) between individuals with and without allergic rhinitis (AR). Research strategies Searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Open Access Theses and Dissertations on April 2, 2024. The study protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XUTSN). Selection criteria Observational studies comparing auditory outcomes between individuals with and without AR were included. Data analysis The Joanna Briggs Institute checklist was used to assess bias. The primary outcome was the mean difference (MD) in auditory thresholds (250Hz to 8000Hz) measured by audiometry. Secondary outcomes included latencies of waves and interpeak intervals. The meta-analysis was conducted using the inverse variance method under a random effects model. Results Five studies with 432 participants were included. Meta-analysis revealed higher auditory thresholds in patients with AR at 4000Hz (MD = 7.83 dB; 95% CI: 2.46 to 13.19; p = 0.004) and 8000Hz (MD = 8.66 dB; 95% CI: 2.70 to 14.62; p = 0.004). No differences were observed for frequencies <4000Hz or in BERA outcomes. Conclusion This meta-analysis identified significantly higher auditory thresholds at 4000Hz and 8000Hz in individuals with AR, suggesting a potential peripheral auditory effect. No consistent differences were found in BERA parameters. These findings suggest…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 432 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free