Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Contenido relacionado

Ir a:

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados

Topics

Comparison 1 TAILORED STRATEGY versus NON TAILORED STRATEGY, Outcome 1 Mean Percent Use of HPDs.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 TAILORED STRATEGY versus NON TAILORED STRATEGY, Outcome 1 Mean Percent Use of HPDs.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 1 Mean Percent Use of HPDs.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 1 Mean Percent Use of HPDs.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 2 Improvement in intention of use over baseline.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 2 Improvement in intention of use over baseline.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 3 Changes in intention of HPD use in the future.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 3 Changes in intention of HPD use in the future.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 2 TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 4 Improvement in mean use of HPDs.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 4 Improvement in mean use of HPDs.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 3 NON TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 1 Mean Percent Use of HPDs.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 NON TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL, Outcome 1 Mean Percent Use of HPDs.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 4 ALL TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL NON TAILORED STRATEGIES, Outcome 1 Mean Percent use of Hearing Protection Devices (End Point Values).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 ALL TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL NON TAILORED STRATEGIES, Outcome 1 Mean Percent use of Hearing Protection Devices (End Point Values).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 5 ALL TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES, Outcome 1 Mean Percent use of Hearing Protection Devices (End Point Values).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 ALL TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES, Outcome 1 Mean Percent use of Hearing Protection Devices (End Point Values).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 6 ALL NON TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES, Outcome 1 Mean Percent use of Hearing Protection Devices (End Point Values).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 ALL NON TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES, Outcome 1 Mean Percent use of Hearing Protection Devices (End Point Values).

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 MIXED INTERVENTION versus CONTROL, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants who self‐reported the use of HPDs "at least sometimes" ‐ ITT analysis.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 MIXED INTERVENTION versus CONTROL, Outcome 1 Proportion of participants who self‐reported the use of HPDs "at least sometimes" ‐ ITT analysis.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 7 MIXED INTERVENTION versus CONTROL, Outcome 2 Proportion of participants who self‐reported the use of HPDs "at least sometimes" ‐ completer analysis.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 MIXED INTERVENTION versus CONTROL, Outcome 2 Proportion of participants who self‐reported the use of HPDs "at least sometimes" ‐ completer analysis.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva
Table 1. Additional demographic information (Knobloch 1998)

Work exposure

N

All students baseline (%)

N

Students completing both surveys baseline (%)

Year 3

Live on farm

752

79.1

687

81.1

76.0

Work on farm

753

93.9

688

94.2

86.0

Live or work on farm

752

96.0

688

96.5

90.7

Average hours/week of farm work

704

19.0

580

19.9

26.4

Operate tractors*

707

83.5

582

87.1

91.4

Average hours/week of tractor use

588

6.6

487

6.6

9.6

Operate combine

707

7.8

581

6.4

17.0

Operate silo blower

707

46.5

581

49.7

67.1

Operate haybine

707

37.6

581

38.9

63.7

Operate field shopper

707

29.3

581

29.4

50.4

Operate grain or bale elevator

707

73.3

581

77.5

83.8

Operate silo inloader

707

57.6

581

62.1

74.0

Operate barn cleaner

707

63.1

581

66.6

76.8

Operate milking equipment

707

68.3

581

71.8

75.9

Operate chain‐saw

752

38.3

687

37.1

62.3

Operate lawn mowers/tractors

751

97.5

687

97.4

98.0

*Around half of the participants began at 10 years old or less. Only 5 students operated tractors with cabs exclusively. 39% reported no cabs on any tractors. 2% reported use of hearing protection devices nearly all the time when exposed to noise. 74% reported they never used HPD.

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Additional demographic information (Knobloch 1998)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Table 2. Hearing events already experienced (Knobloch 1998)

Event

Participants (%)

Ringing

49%

Stuffed ears after noise exposure

62%

Self‐reported hearing as excellent

28%

Self‐reported hearing as good

59%

Self‐reported hearing as only fair or poor

13%

Father with hearing problem

18%

Belief that loud noise could damage hearing

84%

Unsure that loud noise could damage hearing

13%
Figuras y tablas -
Table 2. Hearing events already experienced (Knobloch 1998)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Table 3. Factors influencing the use of HPDs by compliant students (Knobloch 1998)

Factor

Percentage

Free hearing protector devices

94

Yearly hearing test

90

Mailings to students

77

Teacher influence

68

Classroom instruction

66

Use of sound level meter

61

Current influence

58

TV, radio, or other media

53

Peer influence

29
Figuras y tablas -
Table 3. Factors influencing the use of HPDs by compliant students (Knobloch 1998)
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 1. TAILORED STRATEGY versus NON TAILORED STRATEGY

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean Percent Use of HPDs Show forest plot

2

1727

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

5.82 [2.80, 8.84]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. TAILORED STRATEGY versus NON TAILORED STRATEGY
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 2. TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean Percent Use of HPDs Show forest plot

2

1712

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

6.24 [3.18, 9.29]

2 Improvement in intention of use over baseline Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Year 1

1

403

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.95 [1.54, 10.15]

2.2 Year 2

1

403

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.8 [1.05, 7.44]

3 Changes in intention of HPD use in the future Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 Year 1

1

403

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

6.0 [3.55, 8.45]

3.2 Year 2

1

403

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.0 [1.75, 6.25]

4 Improvement in mean use of HPDs Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 3. NON TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean Percent Use of HPDs Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 3. NON TAILORED STRATEGY versus CONTROL
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 4. ALL TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL NON TAILORED STRATEGIES

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean Percent use of Hearing Protection Devices (End Point Values) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 Booster at 30 days

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 Booster at 90 days

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.3 Boosters at 30 and 90 days

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.4 No Boosters

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 4. ALL TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL NON TAILORED STRATEGIES
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 5. ALL TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean Percent use of Hearing Protection Devices (End Point Values) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 Booster at 30 days

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 Booster at 90 days

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.3 Boosters at 30 and 90 days

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.4 No Boosters

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 5. ALL TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 6. ALL NON TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean Percent use of Hearing Protection Devices (End Point Values) Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 Booster at 30 days

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 Booster at 90 days

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.3 Boosters at 30 and 90 days

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.4 No Boosters

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 6. ALL NON TAILORED STRATEGIES versus ALL CONTROL STRATEGIES
Ir a la tabla de la revisión
Comparison 7. MIXED INTERVENTION versus CONTROL

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Proportion of participants who self‐reported the use of HPDs "at least sometimes" ‐ ITT analysis Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 3 years follow up

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 4 years follow up

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Proportion of participants who self‐reported the use of HPDs "at least sometimes" ‐ completer analysis Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 3 years follow up

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 4 years follow up

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 7. MIXED INTERVENTION versus CONTROL
Ir a la tabla de la revisión