Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 30, 2026

Modified Experimental Conditions for Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Mice and Assessment of Hearing Function and Outer Hair Cell Damage
Published on: February 10, 2023
Occupational noise exposure and hearing loss characteristics of a blue-collar population
Abstract:
Recent studies of health effects from chronic exposure to noise in the workplace have not consistently addressed nonoccupational variables. A cross-sectional study was conducted with 197 randomly selected male hourly workers from a noisy plant (greater than or equal to 89 dBA) in Pittsburgh to fully assess noise exposure and hearing loss, incorporating information on duration of exposure, noise level, occupational and medical histories, audiometric evaluation, and external noise sources. Population audiometric profiles are characteristic of noise-induced hearing loss; mean hearing thresholds for press room men were significantly higher at 2, 3, and 6 kHz (p less than or equal to .05). Only 40% of the men consistently wore hearing protection. Recent use of ototoxic drugs, noisy hobbies/second jobs, military service, family history of hearing loss, and ear-related problems were not found to have a significant effect on hearing levels at high frequencies, suggesting that observed hearing losses were of an occupational origin.
Related Concept Videos
The Availability Heuristic
Data Collection by Observations
An astronomer viewing the motion and brightness of stars in the sky and recording the data is an example of observational data collection. A botanist recording...
PPE Use in Healthcare Settings I: Donning
PPE Use in Healthcare Settings II: Doffing
Standard Precaution
Hand hygiene is the most crucial means to prevent the transmission of disease. Employers are legally required to provide their workers with personal protective equipment (PPE) to minimize exposure or contact with...
Special considerations while measuring blood pressure
Monitoring Both Arms:
Monitoring BP in both arms during the initial assessment is advisable, as the systolic value may differ by five to ten mm Hg between arms. For subsequent BP assessments, use the arm with the higher reading.

