↓ Skip to main content

Tinnitus functional index: validation of the German version for Switzerland

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Tinnitus functional index: validation of the German version for Switzerland
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0669-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole Peter, Tobias Kleinjung, Raphael Jeker, Martin Meyer, Richard Klaghofer, Steffi Weidt

Abstract

Different standardized questionnaires are used to assess tinnitus severity, making comparisons across studies difficult. These questionnaires are also used to measure treatment-related changes in tinnitus although they were not designed for this purpose. To solve these problems, a new questionnaire - the Tinnitus Functional Index (TFI) - has been established. The TFI is highly responsive to treatment-related change and promises to be the new gold standard in tinnitus evaluation. The aim of the current study was to validate a German version of the TFI for a German-speaking population in Switzerland. At the ENT department of the University Hospital Zurich, 264 subjects completed an online survey including the German version for Switzerland of TFI, Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and sociodemographic variables. Internal consistency of the TFI was calculated with Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Pearson correlation coefficients were used for the test-retest reliability of the TFI and to investigate convergent and discriminant validity between the THI and the BDI and BAI, respectively. Factor analysis was assessed using a principal component analysis with oblique rotation. The different factors extracted were then compared with the original questionnaire. The German version of the TFI for Switzerland showed an excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha of 0.97) and an excellent test-retest reliability of 0.91. The convergent validity with THI was high (r = 0.86). The discriminant validity with BAI and BDI showed moderate results (BAI: r = 0.60 and BDI: r = 0.65). In the factor analysis only five factors with one main factor could be extracted instead of eight factors as described in the original version. Nevertheless, relations to the original eight subscales could be demonstrated. The German version of the TFI for Switzerland is a suitable instrument for measuring the impact of tinnitus. The reliability and validity of this version are comparable with the original version of the TFI. Although this study showed only five factors in the factor analysis, relations to the original eight subscales were identified. Therefore, the German version of the TFI for Switzerland can deliver relevant information regarding the different tinnitus domains. Clinical trial registration number on clinicaltrial.gov: NCT01837368 .

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 17%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Lecturer 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 10 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 17%
Psychology 4 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 37%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 May 2017.
All research outputs
#11,778,598
of 15,442,255 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,044
of 1,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,819
of 266,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,442,255 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,660 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them